2001-05-01 CC PacketCity of Southlake, Texas
MEMORANDUM
April 26, 2001
TO: Billy Campbell, City Manager
FROM: Kevin Hugman, Director of Community Services (xt. 1527)
SUBJECT: Authorize the Mayor to enter into a contract for professional services with
Brinkley Sargent Architects for the Recreation Center
Action Requested: City Council approval to enter into a contract for professional services with
Brinkley Sargent Architects for the Recreation Center.
Background
Information: The Teen Center Coordination Committee was established in 1998 in an
effort to gather information and collect input relating to the development of a
Southlake Teen Center. During that time the Committee was actively
involved in defining the scope of the teen center project and working with the
young adults in our community on the facility concept.
In May of 1999, a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) was sent out to eight
local architectural firms with experience in the design and construction of
park and recreational facilities, specifically recreation centers. Five firms
responded and their qualifications were reviewed by staff and interested
members of the Teen Center Design Committee. The firms were considered
based on the following:
• Overall experience and ability to perform the services requested
within the time frame given.
• Experience of the firm in regards to the design and operation of
recreation centers, activity centers, and/or related facilities.
• Ability to display creative proficiency within the concept design while
still addressing basic operating concerns and budget constraints.
• Experience working with public groups, city officials, and city staff.
Brinkley Sargent Architects of Dallas was determined to be the organization
best suited for the Teen Center project based on their experience in recreation
center design, as well as their experience in developing "Enterprise Plans"
for proposed recreation centers to include needs analysis, facility program,
conceptual development, and cost analysis. They are a twenty-five year old
firm specializing in recreational, sports, and public architecture. Brinkley
Sargent has completed design work on over fifteen recreation centers in the
past five years including the Plano Aquatic and Recreation Center, Coppell
r
Billy Campbell, City Manager
April 26, 2001
Page 2
Aquatic and Recreation Center, and the Lee Park Recreation Center in
Irving. Staff contacted six local municipalities and all indicated that they
were very satisfied with the work provided by Brinkley Sargent and would
use them again on future projects.
Although it was later determined that a recreation center would better suit the
overall needs of the community as compared to a teen center, it should be
noted that the architectural qualification review process was based on
recreation center design experience. As a result, Brinkley Sargent Architects
remains the recommended choice to design the new facility.
Financial
Considerations: Funding in the amount of $550,000 for the Recreation Center design is
identified in FY2000/01 of the SPDC Capital Improvements Plan (CIP), and
construction funding in the amount of $5,700,000 is identified in the FY
2001/02 and 2002/02 SPDC Capital Improvements Program. A $750,000
Texas Parks and Wildlife grant will also be sought for the Recreation Center.
Should the City be awarded the grant and the construction budget be
increased, a proportional increase in the professional services contract will be
necessary (this will be done by separate action through SPDC and City
Council).
Fees associated with professional services for the Recreation Center are
based on a construction/design budget of $5,500,000, plus $200,000
construction contingency. The total fees (enterprise plan, site conceptual
plan, architectural design, construction administration and reimbursables) are
not anticipated to exceed $546,625 or 9.9 % of the construction budget.
Basic architectural services and construction administration alone account for
$489,125 or 8.9 % of the construction budget, with the remainder being the
development of an enterprise plan and reimbursable costs.
Basic Architectural Services
Schematic Design (13.4% of total fees**) $73,368.75
- Site Master Plan
- Attendance at eight public meetings
Design Development (18 % * *) $97, 825.00
Construction Documents (35.8%**) $195,650.00
- Landscape and Hardscape Design
- Irrigation Design
- Interior Design and Specifications for
Furniture, Fixtures, and Equipment
Bidding and Negotiating (4.5%**) $24,456.25
Construction Administration (17.9 % * *) $97, 825.00
Enterprise Plan (4.5%**) $25,000.00
3 - 2,
r
r
Billy Campbell, City Manager
April 26, 2001
Page 3
Reimbursables not to exceed (5.9%**) $32,500.00
Geotechnical Investigation
Printing and Delivery Costs
State Licensing and Review Fees
Total Professional Services (100%) $546,625.00
Citizen Input/
Board Review: The Parks and Recreation Board recommended the selection of Brinkley
Sargent Architects at their April 9, 2001 meeting.
SPDC, at their April 23, 2001 meeting, approved entering into an agreement
with Brinkley Sargent Architects for an amount of $546,625 with a
construction budget of $5,500,000, allowing $200,000 for construction
contingency (6-0).
Legal Review: The City Attorney has reviewed the proposed agreement and their comments
have been incorporated.
Alternatives: Alternatives include the following:
Rejection of Brinkley Sargent Architects and request staff start the review
and selection process over.
Supporting
Documents: Supporting documents include the following:
• Draft agreement with Brinkley Sargent Architects.
• Architectural qualifications of Brinkley Sargent Architects.
Staff
Recommendation: City Council approval to enter into an agreement with Brinkley Sargent
Architects for professional services for the Recreation Center enterprise plan,
site conceptual plan, architectural design, and construction administration for
an amount not to exceed $546,625.
NAParks & Recreation\BOARDS\CC\2001\Qtr 3\Brinklysargent.doc
56--2)
Standard Form of Agreement Between Owner and Architect
AIA Document B141 - Electronic Format
THIS DOCUMENT HAS IMPORTANT LEGAL CONSEQUENCES: CONSULTATION WITH AN ATTORNEY IS ENCOURAGED WITH RESPECT TO 11-S
COMPLETION OR MODIFICATION. AUTHENTICATION OF THIS ELECTRONICALLY DRAFTED AIA DOCUMENT MAY BE MADE BY USING A1:1
DOCUMENT D401.
Cop}ri_hI 1917. 1926. 1948. 1951, 1953. 1958. 1951. 1963. 1966. 1967. 1970. 197-1. 1977. !987 by The Ameriear, Institute of Architects. 1735 Ne,c York :\c-_n.::.
`.%k".. aka hinvon. D.C..'_000ti-5292. Reproduction of t is mat:rial herein or suhstani ial quotation of its provisions wthout �%riuen pemission of the A!-% ciolatc,
the c r•�right la\%s of the i'nitcd States and «ill he subject to Icgal prosecution
AGREEMENT
made as of the day of
BETWEEN the Owner:
(Name and address)
City of Southlake
400 N. White Chapel
Southlake, Texas 76092
and the Architect:
(.Name and address)
Brinklev Sargent Architects
5000 Quorum Drive Suite 123
Dallas, Texas 75240
in the year of NineteeFt HandFad and Two Thousand and One
For the following Project:
(Include detailed description of Project• location. address and scope.)
Development of a Recreation Center to be located on the Northwest Corner of Byron Nelson Boulevard and Parkwood.- Project
includes site related work in addition to facility. Budget for construction is SS j00.000.
The Owner and Architect agree as set forth below.
°�- AIA DOCUMENT B 141 - OWNER -ARCHITECT AGREEMENT • FOURTEENTH EDITION - AIA - COPYRIGHT 1987 - THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF
ARCHITECTS, 1735 NEW YORK AVENUE N.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20006-5292.; Unlicensed photocopying violates U.S. copyright laws and is subject to
legal prosecution. This document was electronically produced with the permission of the AIA and can be reproduced without violation until the date of expiration as
noted below.
Electronic Format R141-1987
User Document: B141-UP.DOC -- 4/24/2001. AIA License Number 100804, which expires on 10!7l2001 -- page #1
TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN OWNER AND ARCHITECT
ARTICLE 1
ARCHITECT'S RESPONSIBILITIES
1.1 ARCHITECT'S SERVICES
1.1.1 The Architect's services consist of those services
performed by the Architect, Architect's employees and
Architect's consultants as enumerated in Articles 2 and 3 of
this Agreement and any other services included in Article 12.
1.1.2 The Architect's services shall be performed as
expeditiously as is consistent with professional skill and care
and the orderly progress of the Work. Upon request of the
Owner, the Architect shall submit for the Owner's approval a
schedule for the performance of the Architect's services
which may be adjusted as the Project proceeds, and shall
include allowances for periods of time required for the
Owner's review and for approval of submissions by
authorities having jurisdiction over the Project. Time limits
established by this schedule approved by the Owner shall not,
except for reasonable cause, be exceeded by the Architect or
Owner.
1.1.3 The services covered by this Agreement are subject
i the time limitations contained in Subparagraph 1 ] .5.1.
ARTICLE 2
SCOPE OF ARCHITECT'S BASIC SERVICES
2.1 DEFINITION
2.1.1 The Architect's Basic Services consist of those
described in Paragraphs 2.2 through 2.6 and any other
services identified in Article 12 as part of Basic Services, and
include normal structural, mechanical and electrical
engineering services.
2.2 SCHEMATIC DESIGN PHASE
2.2.1 The Architect shall review the program furnished by
the Owner to ascertain the requirements of the Project and
shall arrive at a mutual understanding of such requirements
with the Owner.
2.2.2 The Architect shall provide a preliminary evaluation
of the Owner's program, schedule and construction budget
requirements, each in terms of the other, subject to the
limitations set forth in Subparagraph 5.2.1.
2.2.3 The Architect shall review with the Owner
alternative approaches to design and construction of the
Project.
2.2.4 Based on the mutually agreed -upon program,
schedule and construction budget requirements, the Architect
shall prepare, for approval by the Owner, Schematic Design
Documents consisting of drawings and other documents
illustrating the scale and relationship of Project components.
2.2.5 The Architect shall submit to the Owner a
preliminary estimate of Construction Cost based on current
area, volume or other unit costs.
2.3 DESIGN DEVELOPMENT PHASE
2.3.1 Based on the approved Schematic Design
Documents and any adjustments authorized by the Owner in
the program, schedule or construction budget, the Architect
shall prepare, for approval by the Owner, Design
Development Documents consisting of drawings and other
documents to fix and describe the size and character of the
Project as to architectural, structural, mechanical and
electrical systems, materials and such other elements as may
be appropriate.
2.3.2 The Architect shall advise the Owner of any
adjustments to the preliminary estimate of Construction Cost.
2.4 CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS PHASE
2.4.1 Based on the approved Design Development
Documents and any further adjustments in the scope or
quality of the Project or in the construction budget authorized
by the Owner, the Architect shall prepare, for approval by the
Owner, Construction Documents consisting of Drawings and
Specifications setting forth in detail the requirements for the
construction of the Project.
2.4.2 The Architect shall assist the Owner in the
preparation of the necessary bidding information, bidding
forms, the Conditions of the Contract, and the form of
Agreement between the Owner and Contractor.
2.4.3 The Architect shall advise the Owner of any
adjustments to previous preliminary estimates of Construction
Cost indicated by changes in requirements or general market
IA DOCUMENT B 141 - OWNER -ARCHITECT AGREEMENT - FOURTEENTH EDITION - AIA - COPYRIGHT 1987 - THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF
''""ARCHITECTS, 1735 NEW YORK AVENUE N.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20006-5292.; Unlicensed photocopying violates U.S. copyright laws and is subject to
legal prosecution. This document was electronically produced with the permission of the AIA and can be reproduced without violation until the date of expiration as
noted below. r—
Electronic Format B141-1987
User Document: B141-UP DOC -- 4/24/2001. AIA License Number 100804, which expires on 10/7/2001 -- Page #2
conditions.
meet 4ha44 -net -fie feqUifed -te fak@ L-XhaU5ti*e 8+
2.4.4 The Architect shall assist the Owner in connection
with the Owner's responsibility for filing documents required
)r the approval of governmental authorities having
jurisdiction over the Project.
2.5 BIDDING OR NEGOTIATION PHASE
2.5.1 The Architect, following the Owner's approval of the
Construction Documents and of the latest preliminary
estimate of Construction Cost, shall assist the Owner in
obtaining bids or negotiated proposals and assist in awarding
and preparing contracts for construction.
2.6 CONSTRUCTION PHASE -ADMINISTRATION
OF THE CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
2.6.1 The Architect's responsibility to provide Basic
Services for the Construction Phase under this Agreement
commences with the award of the Contract for Construction
and terminates at the earlier of the issuance to the Owner of
the final Certificate for Payment or 60 days after the date of
Substantial Completion of the Work.
2.6.2 The Architect shall provide administration of the
Contract for Construction as set forth below and in the edition
of AIA Document A201, General Conditions of the Contract
for Construction, current as of the date of this Agreement,
nless otherwise provided in this Agreement.
2.6.3 Duties, responsibilities and limitations of authority
of the Architect shall not be restricted, modified or extended
without written agreement of the Owner and Architect with
consent of the Contractor, which consent shall not be
unreasonably withheld.
2.6.4 The Architect shall be a representative of and shall
advise and consult with the Owner (1) during construction
ufft44-4f+a1 payment-te44e CeAtraetaf4-4ue, and (2) as an
Additional Service at the Owner's direction from time to time
during the correction period described in the Contract for
Construction. The Architect shall have authority to act on
behalf of the Owner only to the extent provided in this
Agreement unless otherwise modified by written instrument.
2.6.5 The ^re"iteEt-sha4 -visit 41+e mite -at s
rr. ..... ....... ... I-
_. _ .. .. __.. .. _. __ _..__ -a ---
theOwHe -and Afekitee -in wFiting-te ieEefrte 1,-enefa4k}=
€amilia^�^a'css and qualiPy afthe WaflE eted
a mannef iRdiOatiAg that the WOFIE-when Eefffp101i wilibeiR
aeEeFEla-'kith -the CeRtFaet Documents. - l 4awevef- -the-
Of the WE) FIE. - -OR -tl;e 13as+5 -4 mite -as -aF�-
afehiteet, the AFehiteet -keep44e01A'Re ififffffie OfthO
moo' > Mid Shall a
the Ownet bast defects -apA defieiefieies 4 -the Wer-!F
Reference Article 12.1.7 (Afore extensive site representation may be
agreed to as an Additional Service, as described in Paragraph 3. 2.)
2.6.6 The "hitet-ha4-F,et have eefitfel eve haFge
of -and 4ia4 -Pet -be Fespensible 49f eafistf:;uetiefi means,
methods, techniques, des-OfJ3FE)GeElHF@5,-6f-€ef sa€ety
pfecafftiens .
these -afe -e4e4y -the GE)HtraEirorS i1 4ity-UREleF 44,_-
EE)ntfaEt -fef Cans fuetien.. - -The Ar-chitest-s#+a4 -net -be-
fespensible-€ef-t#e G^zvRtfaStviSeh0dUI@S-ef fai}afe-te CaFfy
ea44heWeflE-in aceefdanee-A444iegentfaet —
T4fe A� i e iteet shall flet have OfaEtS OF
efniSsiens $f -the E9^moms6ivr, , �f 44eif v-@ nts-
ef efnpleees of any et43ef a
the WeFk.Reference Article 12.1.8
2.6.7 The Architect shall at all times have access to the
Work wherever it is in preparation or progress.
2.6.8 Except as may otherwise be provided in the Contract
Documents or when direct communications have been
specially authorized, the Owner and Contractor shall
communicate through the Architect. Communications by and
with the Architect's consultants shall be through the
Architect.
2.6.9 Based on the Architect's observations and
evaluations of the Contractor's Applications for Payment, the
Architect shall review and certify the amounts due the
Contractor.
2.6.10 The Architect's certification for payment shall
constitute a representation to the Owner, based on the
Architect's observations at the site as provided in
Subpafaaafaph 2-6.5 Article 12.1.7 and on the data comprising
the Contractor's Application for Payment, that the Work has
progressed to the point indicated and that, to the best of the
Architect's knowledge, information and belief, quality of the
Work is in accordance with the Contract Documents. The
foregoing representations are subject to an evaluation of the
Work for conformance with the Contract Documents upon
Substantial Completion, to results of subsequent tests and
inspections, to minor deviations from the Contract
Documents correctable prior to completion and to specific
qualifications expressed by the Architect. The issuance of a
Certificate for Payment shall further constipate a
representation that the Contractor is entitled to payment in the
,IA DOCUMENT B141 - OWNER -ARCHITECT AGREEMENT - FOURTEENTH EDITION - AIA - COPYRIGHT 1987 - THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF
ARCHITECTS, 1735 NEW YORK AVENUE N.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20006-5292., Unlicensed photocopying violates U.S. copyright laws and is subject to
legal prosecution. This document was electronically produced with the permission of the AIA and can be reproduced without violation until the date of expiration as
noted below.
Electronic Format B141-1987
User Document: 6141-UP.DOC -- 4/24/2001. AIA License Number 100804, which expires on 10/7/2001 -- Page #3
amount certified. However, the issuance of a Certificate for
Payment shall not be a representation that the Architect has
(1) made exhaustive or continuous on -site inspections to
check the quality or quantity of the Work, (2) reviewed
►nstruction means, methods, techniques, sequences or
``procedures, (3) reviewed copies of requisitions received from
Subcontractors and material suppliers and other data
requested by the Owner to substantiate the Contractor's right
to payment or (4) ascertained how or for what purpose the
Contractor has used money previously paid on account of the
Contract Sum.
2.6.11 The Architect shall have authority to reject Work
which does not conform to the Contract Documents.
Whenever the Architect considers it necessary or advisable
for implementation of the intent of the Contract Documents,
the Architect will have authority to require additional
inspection or testing of the Work in accordance with the
provisions of the Contract Documents, whether or not such
Work is fabricated, installed or completed. However, neither
this authority of the Architect nor a decision made in good
faith either to exercise or not to exercise such authority shall
give rise to a duty or responsibility of the Architect to the
Contractor, Subcontractors, material and equipment suppliers,
their agents or employees or other persons performing
portions of the Work.
2.6.12 The Architect shall review and approve or take other
appropriate action upon Contractor's submittals such as Shop
-)rawings, Product Data and Samples, but only for the limited
`purpose of checking for conformance with information given
and the design concept expressed in the Contract Documents.
The Architect's action shall be taken with such reasonable
promptness as to cause no delay in the Work or in the
construction of the Owner or of separate contractors, while
allowing sufficient time in the Architect's professional
judgment to permit adequate review. Review of such
submittals is not conducted for the purpose of determining the
accuracy and completeness of other details such as
dimensions and quantities or for substantiating instructions
for installation or performance of equipment or systems
designed by the Contractor, all of which remain the
responsibility of the Contractor to the extent required by the
Contract Documents. The Architect's review shall not
constitute approval of safety precautions or, unless otherwise
specifically stated by the Architect, of construction means,
methods, techniques, sequences or procedures. The
Architect's approval of a specific item shall not indicate
approval of an assembly of which the item is a component.
When professional certification of performance
characteristics of materials, systems or equipment is required
by the Contract Documents, the Architect shall be entitled to
rely upon such certification to establish that the materials,
systems or equipment will meet the performance criteria
required by the Contract Documents.
2.6.13 The Architect shall prepare Change Orders and
Construction Change Directives, with supporting
documentation and data if deemed necessary by the Architect
as provided in Subparagraphs 3.1.1 and 3.3.3, for the Owner's
approval and execution in accordance with the Contract
Documents, and may authorize minor changes in the Work
not involving an adjustment in the Contract Sum or an
extension of the Contract Time which are not inconsistent
with the intent of the Contract Documents.
2.6.14 The Architect shall conduct inspections to determine
the date or dates of Substantial Completion and the date of
final completion, shall receive and forward to the Owner for
the Owner's review and records written warranties and related
documents required by the Contract Documents and
assembled by the Contractor, and shall issue a final
Certificate for Payment upon compliance with the
requirements of the Contract Documents.
2.6.15 The Architect shall interpret and decide matters
concerning performance of the Owner and Contractor under
the requirements of the Contract Documents on written
request of either the Owner or Contractor. The Architect's
response to such requests shall be made with reasonable
promptness and within any time limits agreed upon.
2.6.16 Interpretations and decisions of the Architect shall
be consistent with the intent of and reasonably inferable from
the Contract Documents and shall be in writing or in the form
of drawings. When making such interpretations and initial
decisions, the Architect shall endeavor to secure faithful
performance by both Owner and Contractor, shall not show
partiality to either, and shall not be liable for results of
interpretations or decisions so rendered in good faith.
2.6.17 The Architect's decisions on matters relating to
aesthetic effect shall be final if consistent with the intent
expressed in the Contract Documents.
2.6.18 The Architect shall render written decisions within a
reasonable time on all claims, disputes or other matters in
question between the Owner and Contractor relating to the
execution or progress of the Work as provided in the Contract
Documents.
2.6.19 44e "- t's deeisieRs -en ems; disputes -ef--
O*ff inal4ef-s;-including these in questieft bepweea the Owner
3n4 steF-encept fe these .—elating — gthPti6 ecc�.�
pfek'ided -in 4-7, 4+a4 -be-sulajeet 4o-
IA DOCUMENT B141 - OWNER -ARCHITECT AGREEMENT - FOURTEENTH EDITION - AIA - COPYRIGHT 1987 - THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF
'--ARCHITECTS, 1735 NEW YORK AVENUE N.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20006-5292.; Unlicensed photocopying violates U.S. copyright laws and is subject to
legal prosecution. This document was electronically produced with the permission of the AIA and can be reproduced without violation until the date of expiration as
noted below. S -
3� Electronic Format B141-1987
User Document: B141-UP.D0C -- 4124/2001. AIA License Number 100804, which expires on 10/7,12001 -- Page #4
ar-bitFatieftpFek,ided-+n4#is " ;t 4R414e-C
Dee meR;s.
ARTICLE 3
ADDITIONAL SERVICES
3.1 GENERAL
3.1.1 The services described in this Article 3 are not
included in Basic Services unless so identified in Article 12,
and they shall be paid for by the Owner as provided in this
Agreement, in addition to the compensation for Basic
Services. The services described under Paragraphs 3.2 and
3.4 shall only be provided if authorized or confirmed in
writing by the Owner. If services described under Contingent
Additional Services in Paragraph 3.3 are required due to
circumstances beyond the Architect's control, the Architect
shall notify the Owner prior to commencing such services. If
the Owner deems that such services described under
Paragraph 3.3 are not required, the Owner shall give prompt
written notice to the Architect. If the Owner indicates in
writing that all or part of such Contingent Additional Services
are not required, the Architect shall have no obligation to
provide those services.
3.2 PROJECT REPRESENTATION BEYOND
BASIC SERVICES
3.2.1 If more extensive representation at the site than is
described in Subparagraph 2.6.5 is required, the Architect
`%wahall provide one or more Project Representatives to assist in
carrying out such additional on -site responsibilities.
3.2.2 Project Representatives shall be selected, employed
and directed by the Architect, and the Architect shall be
compensated therefor as agreed by the Owner and Architect.
The duties, responsibilities and limitations of authority of
Project Representatives shall be as described in the edition of
AIA Document B352 current as of the date of this
Agreement, unless otherwise agreed.
3.2.3 Through the observations by such Project
Representatives, the Architect shall endeavor to provide
further protection for the Owner against defects and
deficiencies in the Work, but the furnishing of such project
representation shall not modify the rights, responsibilities or
obligations of the Architect as described elsewhere in this
Agreement.
3.3 CONTINGENT ADDITIONAL SERVICES
3.3.1 Making revisions in Drawings, Specifications or
other documents when such revisions area
.1 inconsistent with approvals or instructions
previously given by the Owner, including revisions
made necessary by adjustments in the Owner's
program or Project budget;
.2 required by the enactment or revision of codes, laws
or regulations subsequent to the preparation of such
documents; or
.3 due to changes required as a result of the Owner's
failure to render decisions in a timely manner.
3.3.2 Providing services required because of significant
changes in the Project including, but not limited to, size,
quality, complexity, the Owner's schedule, or the method of
bidding or negotiating and contracting for construction,
except for services required under Subparagraph 5.2.5.
3.3.3 Preparing Drawings not in original scone of rp oiect,
Specifications and other documentation and supporting data,
evaluating Contractor's proposals, and providing other
services in connection with Change Orders and Construction
Change Directives.
3.3.4 Providing services in connection with evaluating
substitutions proposed by the Contractor and making
subsequent revisions to Drawings, Specifications and other
documentation resulting therefrom.
3.3.5 Providing consultation concerning replacement of
Work damaged by fire or other cause during construction,
and furnishing services required in connection with the
replacement of such Work.
3.3.6 Providing services made necessary by the default of
the Contractor, by major defects or deficiencies in the Work
of the Contractor, or by failure of performance of either the
Owner or Contractor under the Contract for Construction.
3.3.7 Providing services in evaluating an extensive
number of claims submitted by the Contractor or others in
connection with the Work.
3.3.8 Providing services in connection with a public
hearing, arbitration proceeding or legal proceeding except
where the Architect is parry thereto.
3.3.9 Preparing documents for alternate, separate or
sequential bids or providing services in connection with
bidding, negotiation or construction prior to the completion
of the Construction Documents Phase.
.IA DOCUMENT B141 - OWNER -ARCHITECT AGREEMENT - FOURTEENTH EDITION - AIA - COPYRIGHT 1987 - THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF
""ARCHITECTS. 1735 NEW YORK AVENUE N.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20006-5292.; Unlicensed photocopying violates U.S. copyright laws and is subject to
legal prosecution. This document was electronically produced with the permission of the AIA and can be reproduced without violation until the date of expiration as
noted below.
Electronic Format B141-1987
User Document: B141-UP.DOC -- 4/24/2001. AIA License Number 100804, which expires on 10/7/2001 -- Page #5
3.4 OPTIONAL ADDITIONAL SERVICES
facilities.
3.4.1 Providing analyses of the Owner's needs and
programming the requirements of the Project.Ref 12.1.2
3.4.2 PFeviding dial €easier -e+ ref speeiai
studies.
3.4.3 Providing planning surveys, site evaluations or
comparative studies of prospective sites.
3.4.4 Providing special surveys, environmental studies and
submissions required for approvals of governmental
authorities or others having jurisdiction over the Project.
3.4.5 Providing services relative to future facilities,
systems and equipment.
3.4.6 Providing services to investigate existing conditions
or facilities or to make measured drawings thereof
3.4.7 Providing services to verify the accuracy of
drawings or other information furnished by the Owner.
3.4.8 Providing coordination of construction performed by
separate contractors or by the Owner's own forces and
coordination of services required in connection with
^onstruction performed and equipment supplied by the
owner.
3.4.9 Providing services in connection with the work of a
construction manager or separate consultants retained by the
Owner.
3.4.10 Providing detailed estimates of Construction Cost
3.4.11 Providing detailed quantity surveys or inventories of
material, equipment and labor.
3.4.12 .
3.4.13 lfeviding iRterie tenth-simila
regaiced-fe+-e-F-in E@RfIeEtiORitl}e Cr;eeeeat-
ef ifistakatieR $f e, fufflishings -;Rd -related
eip+reet.Ref 12.1.3
3.4.14 Providing services for planning tenant or rental
spaces.
3.4.15 Making investigations, inventories of materials or
equipment, or valuations and detailed appraisals of existing
3.4.16 Preparing a set of reproducible record drawings
showing significant changes in the Work made during
construction based on marked -up prints, drawings and other
data furnished by the Contractor to the Architect.
3.4.17 Providing assistance in the utilization of equipment
or systems such as testing, adjusting and balancing,
preparation of operation and maintenance manuals, training
personnel for operation and maintenance, and consultation
during operation.
3.4.18 Providing services after issuance to the Owner of the
final Certificate for Payment, or in the absence of a final
Certificate for Payment, more than 60 days after the date of
Substantial Completion of the Work.
3.4.19 PFO Y idin j� -4 CORSUltaRtS 48f erlff t#af
hcs,e, t,� Fa-, stfiucwFal, meehanieal -arA ot� al
Serrtises.
3.4.20 Providing any other services not otherwise included
in this Agreement or not customarily furnished in accordance
with generally accepted architectural practice.
ARTICLE 4
OWNER'S RESPONSIBILITIES
4.1 The Owner shall provide full information regarding
requirements for the Project, including a program which shall
set forth the Owner's objectives, schedule, constraints and
criteria, including space requirements and relationships,
flexibility, expandability, special equipment, systems and site
requirements.
4.2 The Owner shall establish and update an overall
budget for the Project, including the Construction Cost, the
Owner's other costs and reasonable contingencies related to
all of these costs.
4.3 If requested by the Architect, the Owner shall
furnish evidence that financial arrangements have been made
to fulfill the Owner's obligations under this Agreement.
4.4 The Owner shall designate a representative
authorized to act on the Owner's behalf with respect to the
Project. The Owner or such authorized representative shall
render decisions in a timely manner pertaining to documents
submitted by the Architect in order to avoid unreasonable
delay in the orderly and sequential progress of the Architect's
lA DOCUMENT B141 - OWNER -ARCHITECT AGREEMENT - FOURTEENTH EDITION - AIA - COPYRIGHT 1987 - THE Ay1ERICAN INSTITUTE OF
ARCHITECTS, 1735 NEW YORK AVENUE N.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20006-5292.; Unlicensed photocopying violates U.S. copyright laws and is subject to
legal prosecution. This document was electronically produced with the permission of the AIA and can be reproduced without violation until the date of expiration as
noted below.
3 -9 Electronic Format B141-1987
User Document 13141-UP.DOC -, 4/24/2001. AIA License Number 100804, which expires on 10/7/2001 -- Pane #6)
services.
4.5 The Owner shall furnish surveys describing physical
characteristics, legal limitations and utility locations for the
ite of the Project, and a written legal description of the site.
'*—Ihe surveys and legal information shall include, as
applicable, grades and lines of streets, alleys, pavements and
adjoining property and structures; adjacent drainage;
rights -of -way, restrictions, easements. encroachments,
zoning, deed restrictions, boundaries and contours of the site;
locations, dimensions and necessary data pertaining to
existing buildings, other improvements and trees; and
information concerning available utility services and lines,
both public and private, above and below grade, including
inverts and depths. All the information on the survey shall be
referenced to a project benchmark.
4.6 The Owner shall €taish pay for as a reimbursable
expense the services of geotechnical engineers when such
services are requested by the Architect. Such services may
include but are not limited to test borings, test pits,
determinations of soil bearing values, percolation tests,
evaluations of hazardous materials, ground corrosion and
resistivity tests, including necessary operations for
anticipating subsoil conditions, with reports and appropriate
professional recommendations.
4.6.1 The Owner shall furnish the services of other
consultants when such services are reasonably required by the
cope of the Project and are requested by the Architect.
1% .
4.7 The Owner shall furnish structural, mechanical,
chemical, air and water pollution tests, tests for hazardous
materials, and other laboratory and environmental tests,
inspections and reports required by law or the Contract
Documents.
4.8 The Owner shall furnish all legal, accounting and
insurance counseling services as may be necessary at any
time for the Project, including auditing services the Owner
may require to verify the Contractor's Applications for
Payment or to ascertain how or for what purposes the
Contractor has used the money paid by or on behalf of the
Owner.
4.9 The services, information, surveys and reports
required by Paragraphs 4.5 through 4.8 shall be furnished at
the Owner's expense, and the Architect shall be entitled to
rely upon the accuracy and completeness thereof.
4.11 The proposed language of certificates or
certifications requested of the Architect or Architect's
consultants shall be submitted to the Architect for review and
approval at least 14 days prior to execution. The Owner shall
not request certifications that would require knowledge or
services beyond the scope of this Agreement.
ARTICLE 5
CONSTRUCTION COST
5.1 DEFINITION
5.1.1 The Construction Cost shall be the total cost or
estimated cost to the Owner of all elements of the Project
designed or specified by the Architect.
5.1.2 The Construction Cost shall include the cost at
current market rates of labor and materials furnished by the
Owner and equipment designed, specified, selected or
specially provided for by the Architect, plus a reasonable
allowance for the Contractor's overhead and profit. In
addition, a reasonable allowance for contingencies shall be
included for market conditions at the time of bidding and for
changes in the Work during construction.
5.1.3 Construction Cost does not include the
compensation of the Architect and Architect's consultants, the
costs of the land, rights -of -way, financing or other costs
which are the responsibility of the Owner as provided in
Article 4.
5.2 RESPONSIBILITY FOR CONSTRUCTION
COST
5.2.1 Evaluations of the Owner's Project budget,
preliminary estimates of Construction Cost and detailed
estimates of Construction Cost, if any, prepared by the
Architect, represent the Architect's best judgment as a design
professional familiar with the construction industry. It is
recognized, however, that neither the Architect nor the Owner
has control over the cost of labor, materials or equipment,
over the Contractor's methods of determining bid prices, or
over competitive bidding, market or negotiating conditions.
Accordingly, the Architect cannot and does not warrant or
represent that bids or negotiated prices will not vary from the
Owner's Project budget or from any estimate of Construction
Cost or evaluation prepared or agreed to by the Architect.
4.10 Prompt written notice shall be given by the Owner to 6.2.2 No fixed limit of Construction Cost shall be
established as a condition of this Agreement by the
the Architect if the Owner becomes aware of any fault or furnishing, proposal or establishment of a Project budget,
defect in the Project or nonconformance with the Contract unless such fixed limit has been agreed upon in writing and
Documents.
llA DOCUMENT B 141 - OWNER -ARCHITECT AGREEMENT - FOURTEENTH EDITION - AIA - COPYRIGHT 1987 - THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF
ARCHITECTS. 1735 NEW YORK AVENUE N.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20006-5292.; Unlicensed photocopying violates U.S. copyright laws and is subject to
legal prosecution. This document was electronically produced with the permission of the AIA and can be reproduced without violation until the date of expiration as
noted below.
8 - 1 C Electronic Format B141-1987
User Document: B141-UP.DOC -- 4/24/2001. AIA License Number 100804, which expires on 10/7/2001 -- Page #7
signed by the parties hereto. If such a fixed limit has been
established, the Architect shall be permitted to include
contingencies for design, bidding and price escalation, to
determine what materials, equipment, component systems and
,.., pes of construction are to be included in the Contract
Documents, to make reasonable adjustments in the scope of
the Project and to include in the Contract Documents
alternate bids to adjust the Construction Cost to the fixed
limit. Fixed limits, if any, shall be increased in the amount of
an increase in the Contract Sum occurring after execution of
the Contract for Construction.
5.2.3 If the Bidding or Negotiation Phase has not
commenced within 90 days after the Architect submits the
Construction Documents to the Owner, any Project budget or
fixed limit of Construction Cost shall be adjusted to reflect
changes in the general level of prices in the construction
industry between the date of submission of the Construction
Documents to the Owner and the date on which proposals are
sought.
5.2.4 If a fixed limit of Construction Cost (adjusted as
provided in Subparagraph 5.2.3) is exceeded by the lowest
bona fide bid or negotiated proposal, the Owner shall:
.1 g4 a WF-44PA appFeWat -4-M-iHGFease -its -&u-eh fixed
41*4;
.2 aethE)FiZe �g -er-�et�egeFia�it -Of-Frejee
.3 if the-Pr-ejeet4s abandened, inate4aasser-danee
.4 cooperate in revising the Project scope and quality as
required to reduce the Construction Cost.
5.2.5 If the Owner chooses to proceed under Clause
5.2.4.4, the Architect, without additional charge, shall modify
the Contract Documents as necessary to comply with the
fixed limit, if established as a condition of this Agreement.
The modification of Contract Documents shall be the limit of
the Architect's responsibility arising out of the establishment
of a fixed limit. The Architect shall be entitled to
compensation in accordance with this Agreement for all
services performed whether or not the Construction Phase is
commenced.
ARTICLE 6
USE OF ARCHITECT'S DRAWINGS,
SPECIFICATIONS AND OTHER DOCUMENTS
6.1 The Drawings, Specifications and other documents
prepared by the Architect for this Project are instruments of
the Architect's service for use solely with respect to this
Project and, unless otherwise provided, the Architect shall be
deemed the author of these documents and shall retain all
common law, statutory and other reserved rights, including
the copyright. The Owner shall be permitted to retain copies,
including reproducible copies, of the Architect's Drawings,
Specifications and other documents for information and
reference in connection with the Owner's use and occupancy
of the Project. The Architect's Drawings, Specifications or
other documents shall not be used by the Owner or others on
other projects, for additions to this Project or for completion
of this Project by others, unless the Architect is adjudged to
be in default under this Agreement, except by agreement in
writing and with appropriate compensation to the Architect.
6.2 Submission or distribution of documents to meet
official regulatory requirements or for similar purposes in
connection with the Project is not to be construed as
publication in derogation of the Architect's reserved rights.
ARTICLE 7
ARBITRATION
7.1 Claims, disputes -ef eth e-mattefs -its Mesa ie�
between 41te-pai4ies -to 41++s AgeetReat aFisifig -O*t -Of -ef-
Hiabit}g-te4#is "-�rHe bFea6h theRE)f Shall UbjeCt
to -affd dec�ed * fbi4ariea -iff-aesef4anee -*ith -tie
C-A-Aswuetiefi 'lfidustf:y A r4TT,vitFatien -Rules -4 4he Tt" ir'.,Cer-iiceaflP
AFbitFatfeR AssesiatieeeuFFentty4 egaet unless -the paFties-
7.2 D eF arbitFation shall -iff wig
the ether -pafty -te 4h46 -Agfeemew ;affd -w4h 4he Amffiean
Afbitfatian ia;;en. - -A demand -fef ar-b4atiea ill 49�e-
FR44 within -a r-easenable 4i:i+e after- -the c4aim, dispute -Of-
ethff fnaaef-its quest:ion4tas aFiSOR. --*-ee ;-shalt4he-
dem-;i d- for ffbitfation be made ..Fier the date ,, hAn :.....:....:....
a
eF et#e-iR-q+es i A- R
7.3 NO afbitFatiOR -afisie; -e+a -af -of r-elating -te
AgreemeRt iRelwde,* eeRsetidatieFi, jeiRde 4e-af�y-
.ter- manner-, an sad•.: al RtiP, net to this
AgifeemeRt except* -wFiReR,n�� signed*4he
-e_,ritt�a��ifling-aSpae4€s-
rSLlii'e'Rcc-te 4ttt5 iTr,,Feef icll t'�f"7Ctt4}y4he Ownef, Af:ehitech
and -nay ethe PeFseaffitiPV seaght4e-4e joined. -mot
to 4i� Q -aft A di t i(4aal PeFSE)R -eF -entity -shall
net COR54dt eOHSL- rt4e-afbitf-atieR e€a} stag dlispHte-er--
e R}atteF4R gaestieR-Ret�eser bed4a the ilfitteR6eRseRt-
IA DOCUMENT B 141 - OWNER -ARCHITECT AGREEMENT - FOURTEENTH EDITION - AIA - COPYRIGHT 1987 - THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF
ARCHITECTS. 1735 NEW YORK AVENUE N.W.. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20006-5292.; Unlicensed photocopying violates U.S. copyright laws and is subject to
legal prosecution. This document was electronically produced with the permission of the AIA and can be reproduced without violation until the date of expiration as
noted below.
i Electronic Format B141-1987
User Document: B141-UP.DOC -- 4/24/2001. AIA License Number 100804, which expires on 10/7/2001 -- Page #8
ef -With -a PeFsen -6f -entity -t}ef Raffled -Of descFibed theFein—
T4:te-€eFegaingzg-Feeffient ;aa�lffeeffie
afbitfate with an additional duly eanseRted
by -the paf4ies 4e -this ^fi t -,lull -be Speeifiealbl
a feFeeable 4 eFdanee with appIieable 4aw --if+ afty e a uft
7.4 4:he aAvafd F0f1d0R4 * 4he ffbitFatef -of aFb4FateFs
steal} -be -+nab end judgmen -Fray -b-e eeteFed Upel} -4 -ice
aeeeFdaiife -*ill} pliable -law -if♦ -any eauF4 having
jWfi5diCti6^ 'rr thefevf—
ARTICLE 8
TERMINATION, SUSPENSION OR
ABANDONMENT
8.1 This 4gfeement may -be * eithef patty
upefi At to th-a
pafty 4a44 substantially -te POFfORR 4 aecaFdanfe -A444 4hk-
tefnns -of -this AgFee ---.,ft -ne -fa+li -of -the Paft�
initiating the
8.2 If the Project is suspended by the Owner for more
than 30 consecutive days, the Architect shall be compensated
for services performed prior to notice of such suspension.
When the Project is resumed, the Architect's compensation
shall be equitably adjusted to provide for expenses incurred in
the interruption and resumption of the Architect's services.
�.3 This Agreement may be terminated by the Owner
upon not less than seven days' written notice to the Architect
in the event that the Project is permanently abandoned. If the
Project is abandoned by the Owner for more than 90
consecutive days, the Architect may terminate this Agreement
by giving written notice.
8.4 Failure of the Owner to make payments to the
Architect in accordance with this Agreement shall be
considered substantial nonperformance and cause for
termination.
8.5 If the Owner fails to make payment when due the
Architect for services and expenses, the Architect may, upon
seven days' written notice to the Owner, suspend performance
of services under this Agreement. Unless payment in full is
received by the Architect within seven days of the date of the
notice, the suspension shall take effect without further notice.
In the event of a suspension of services, the Architect shall
have no liability to the Owner for delay or damage caused the
Owner because of such suspension of services.
8.6 In -the 0",eF}t -&f -let 44e -fa*k -of 4 e
AFGite6t -#e ^'^TxrGhiW0 -shall -be sen}pensated -€ef SeF' 0S
peFfeFfned pftef4a teFfnination, tagetheF-w4h-Reba�
9Xpenses44en-4ue-an4i4 atiOREXpenses-&sdefijjL-d-
a .
8.7 Tefminatien -Expenses aFe --i* -&d44ieft -te-
seaApeasatiae fef Basis dAdditional-gefyieeT-aiA ifielude-
expeases -whie 3 -afe difeetly attfibutable -to at;ef1-. —
TeFmiflatian-Expenses shafl-4e seated as apefeentag�e-e€
the 4etal -fef Basis Sefv-iees Additional -
as fe1jeWF,:
1 T YMty pefeeFtt-444e4etal-se pef}satie 4-e+Basie
SeCUFsbe€efe of dUF-ia,--the a;analysis,
Of SEhefnatie nos;,,., Phases;_
.2 Tett PeFseat Of thO tetalfe peFrsatiet} €eFBasis�nd
Additional SeR,ice$ -Lamed -te -Gate 4 teFfiiinatian
WFS a dWiflrp
the PeSigH
.3 F4*e peFeent efshe €b.; Basis and
Additional tee= eafned -to date -i€ FFinatien
OGEHF5 during any e.
Insert A: Reference 12 1 10
ARTICLE 9
MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
9.1 Unless otherwise provided, this Agreement shall be
governed by the law of the principal place of business of the
Architect. Ref 12.1.12
9.2 Terms in this Agreement shall have the same
meaning as those in AIA Document A201, General
Conditions of the Contract for Construction, current as of the
date of this Agreement.
9.3 Causes of action between the parties to this
Agreement pertaining to acts or failures to act shall be
deemed to have accrued and the applicable statutes of
limitations shall commence to run not later than either the
date of Substantial Completion for acts or failures to act
occurring prior to Substantial Completion, or the date of
issuance of the final Certificate for Payment for acts or
failures to act occurring after Substantial Completion.
9.4 The Owner and Architect waive all rights against
each other and against the contractors, consultants, agents and
employees of the other for damages, but only to the extent
covered by property insurance during construction, except
such rights as they may have to the proceeds of such
insurance as set forth in the edition of AIA Document A201,
General Conditions of the Contract for Construction, current
as of the date of this Agreement. The Owner and .Architect
%IA DOCUMENT B 141 - OWNER -ARCHITECT AGREEMENT - FOURTEENTH EDITION - AIA - COPYRIGHT 1987 - THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF
ARCHITECTS, 1735 NEW YORK AVENUE N.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20006-3292.: Unlicensed photocopying violates U.S. copyright laws and is subject to
legal prosecution. This document was electronically produced with the permission of the AIA and can be reproduced without violation until the date of expiration as
noted below.
6 /,) - I �,z Electronic Format B141-1987
User Document: B141-UP.DOC -- 4/24/2001. AIA License Number 100804, which expires on 10/7/2on1 -- page #9
each shall require similar waivers from their contractors,
consultants and agents.
10.2 REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES
9.5 The Owner and Architect, respectively, bind
iemselves, their partners, successors, assigns and legal
representatives to the other party to this Agreement and to the
partners, successors, assigns and legal representatives of such
other party with respect to all covenants of this Agreement.
Neither Owner nor Architect shall assign this Agreement
without the written consent of the other.
9.6 This Agreement represents the entire and integrated
agreement between the Owner and Architect and supersedes
all prior negotiations, representations or agreements, either
written or oral. This Agreement may be amended only by
written instrument signed by both Owner and Architect.
9.7 Nothing contained in this Agreement shall create a
contractual relationship with or a cause of action in favor of a
third party against either the Owner or Architect.
9.8 Unless otherwise provided in this Agreement, the
Architect and Architect's consultants shall have no
responsibility for the discovery, presence, handling, removal
or disposal of or exposure of persons to hazardous materials
in any form at the Project site, including but not limited to
asbestos, asbestos products, polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB)
or other toxic substances.
�...1.9 The Architect shall have the right to include
representations of the design of the Project, including
photographs of the exterior and interior, among the
Architect's promotional and professional materials. The
Architect's materials shall not include the Owner's
confidential or proprietary information if the Owner has
previously advised the Architect in writing of the specific
information considered by the Owner to be confidential or
proprietary. The owner shall provide professional credit for
the Architect on the construction sign and in the promotional
materials for the Project.
ARTICLE 10
PAYMENTS TO THE ARCHITECT
10.1 DIRECT PERSONNEL EXPENSE
10.1.1 Direct Personnel Expense is defined as the direct
salaries of the Architect's personnel engaged on the Project
and the portion of the cost of their mandatory and customary
contributions and benefits related thereto, such as
employment taxes and other statutory employee benefits,
insurance, sick leave, holidays, vacations, pensions and
similar contributions and benefits.
10.2.1 Reimbursable Expenses are in addition to
compensation for Basic and Additional Services and include
expenses incurred by the Architect and Architect's employees
and consultants in the interest of the Project, as identified in
the following Clauses. A fixed limit of $32,500 has been
established for these costs._ Printing cost include all design
phase plotting and printing S5 sets at eachphase) and 20
co ies of bid sets._ Additional bid or construction issue sets
shall increase the maximum amount identified.
10.2.1.1 Expense of transportation in connection with the
Project; expenses in connection with authorized out-of-town
travel; long-distance communications; and fees paid for
securing approval of authorities having jurisdiction over the
Project.
10.2.1.2 Expense of reproductions, postage and handling
of Drawings, Specifications and other documents in excess of
what is allowed in contract.
10.2.1.3 1 er4- in a&asee by the QwneF, expense
of AvP.14i
bher- than b
ular- fates.
10.2.1.4 Expense of renderings, models and mock-ups
requested by the Owner.
10.2.1.5 Expense of additional insurance coverage or
limits, including professional liability insurance, requested by
the Owner in excess of that normally carried by the Architect
and Architect's consultants.
10.2.1.6 Expense of eatptter-aideddestga awd
Insert _ B: 10.2.1.E Expense ,gf aeotechnical
investiaation.
Insert _ Cl 10.2.1.7 , Expense gf approval process IL
Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation.
10.3 PAYMENTS ON ACCOUNT OF BASIC
SERVICES
10.3.1 An initial payment as set forth in Paragraph 11.1 is
the minimum payment under this Agreement.
10.3.2 Subsequent payments for Basic Services shall be
made monthly and, where applicable, shall be in proportion
to services performed within each phase of service, on the
basis set forth in Subparagraph 11.2.2.
10.3.3 if and to the extent that the time initially established
0A DOCUMENT B 141 - OWNER -ARCHITECT .AGREEMENT - FOURTEENTH EDITION - AIA - COPYRIGHT 1987 - THE AMERICA.N INSTITUTE OF
`'''--ARCHITECTS, 1735 NEW YORK AVENUE N.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20006-5292.; Unlicensed photocopying violates U.S. copyright laws and is subject to
legal prosecution. This document was electronically produced with the permission of the AIA and can be reproduced without violation until the date of expiration as
noted below.
Electronic Format B141-1987
User Document: B141-UP.DOC — 4/24/2001. AIA License Number 100804, which expires on 10/7/2001 -- Page #10
in Subparagraph 11.5.1 of this Agreement is exceeded or
extended through no fault of the Architect, compensation for
any services rendered during the additional period of time
shall be computed in the manner set forth in Subparagraph
'.3.2.
10.3.4 Wherr PeFeeRtage -ef-
9 81`154:U G-t i A- -A- -&f+y PORiORS Of the PrE e06 aye deleted
of -tire Pf:ejec -,ha4 -be ale -to -tie 5eAN' ises afe�
se4 -fet4h -ice-1.2.2, lased -off -4) 44e lowest
beea de did R@,-,E)4m4eQPFepesai, +244-*e-soG4434d-er
pfepesal4 fe60iV@d,4he R1e54Fesee4 elifflififf�' e5tifflate-o€
Ceas4i% -Ce4-efdetailed estimate-a€Cefiswdetiee E-est
10.4 PAYMENTS ON ACCOUNT OF ADDITIONAL
SERVICES
10.4.1 Payments on account of the Architect's Additional
Services and for Reimbursable Expenses shall be made
monthly upon presentation of the Architect's statement of
services rendered or expenses incurred.
10.5 PAYMENTS WITHHELD
10.5.1 No deductions shall be made from the Architect's
compensation on account of penalty, liquidated damages or
other sums withheld from payments to contractors, or on
account of the cost of changes in the Work other than those
for which the Architect has been found to be liable.
10.6 ARCHITECT'S ACCOUNTING RECORDS
10.6.1 Records of Reimbursable Expenses and expenses
pertaining to Additional Services and services performed on
the basis of a multiple of Direct Personnel Expense shall be
available to the Owner or the Owner's authorized
representative at mutually convenient times.
ARTICLE 11
BASIS OF COMPENSATION
The Owner shall compensate the Architect as follows:
11.1 AN INITIAL PAYMENT of zero Dollars ($ 0 ) shall be made upon execution of this Agreement and credited to the
Owner's account at final payment.
"1.2 BASIC COMPENSATION
11.2.1 FOR BASIC SERVICES, as described in Article 2, and any other services included in Article 12 as part of Basic Services,
Basic Compensation shall be computed as follows: (Insert basis of compensation, including stipulated sums, multiples or percentages,
and identify phases to which particular methods of compensation apply, if necessary.)
Stipulated sum of five hundred forty-six thousand six hundred twenty-five dollars ($546.625)
Reimbursable expenses are a fixed amount of S32,500 and is included in the stipulated sum of S546,625.
11.2.2 Where compensation is based on a stipulated sum or percentage of Construction Cost, progress payments for Basic Services
in each phase shall total the following percentages of the total Basic Compensation payable: (Insert additional phases as appropriate.)
Enterprise Plan Fixed Fee $25,000
Balance of Fees ($489.125) as Below:
Schematic Design Phase:
Design Development Phase:
Construction Documents Phase:
Bidding or Negotiation Phase:
Construction Phase:
Total Basic Compensation
11.3 COMPENSATION FOR ADDITIONAL SERVICES
percent( 15 %)
percent (20 %)
percent (40 %)
percent( 5 %)
percent (20 %)
one hundred percent(100%)
1A DOCUMENT B141 - OWNER -ARCHITECT AGREEMENT - FOURTEENTH EDITION - AIA - COPYRIGHT 1987 - THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF
RCHITECTS, 1735 NEW YORK AVENUE N.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20006-5292.: Unlicensed photocopying violates U.S. copyright laws and is subject to
legal prosecution. This document was electronically produced with the permission of the AIA and can be reproduced without violation until the date of expiration as
noted below. r"
Electronic Format B141-1987
User Document: 3141-UP.D00 -- 4/24/2001 AIA License Number 100804, which expires on 10/7/2001 -- Page #11
11.3.1 FOR PROJECT REPRESENTATION BEYOND BASIC SERVICES, as described in Paragraph 3.2, compensation shall be
computed as follows:
Additional scopes of work will be defined and fees for that scope of work will be fixed Work will not proceed until agreed upon by
owner.
'kftw
11.3.2 FOR ADDITIONAL SERVICES OF THE ARCHITECT, as described in Articles 3 and 12, other than (1) Additional Project
Representation, as described in Paragraph 3.2, and (2) services included in Article 12 as part of Basic Services, but excluding services
of consultants, compensation shall be computed as follows:
(Insert basis of compensation, including rates and/or multiples of Direct Personnel Expense for Principals and employees, and identify Principals and classify
employees, if required. Identify specific services to which particular methods of compensation apply, if necessary.)
Same as per Paragraph 11.3.1.1
11.3.3 FOR ADDITIONAL SERVICES OF CONSULTANTS, including additional structural, mechanical and electrical
engineering services and those provided under Subparagraph 3.4.19 or identified in Article 12 as part of Additional Services, a
multiple of One and one tenth ( 1.10) times the amounts billed to the Architect for such services.
(Identify specific types of consultants in Article 11, if required.)
11.4 REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES
11.4.1 FOR REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES, as described in Paragraph 10.2, and any other items included in Article 12 as
Reimbursable Expenses, a multiple of One and one tenth( 1.10 ) times the expenses incurred by the Architect, the Architect's
employees and consultants in the interest of the Project.
11.5 ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS
11.5.1 IF THE BASIC SERVICES covered by this Agreement have not been completed withinTh� ( � months of the date
hereof, through no fault of the Architect, extension of the Architect's services beyond that time shall be compensated as provided in
Subparagraphs 10.3.3 and 11.3.2.
11.5.2 Payments are due and payable THIRTY ( 30 ) days from the date of the Architect's invoice. a paid-&IXT4
( 60 ) days 4heinvaiee daEeshall ifltt;eSt- t-the-Fate MEefedbe-IeW-e ifl the abseflCe- ;f e@f Rt a -legal rateFeVaPifig-
(Insert rate of interest agreed upon.)
(Usury laws and requirements under the Federal Truth in Lending Act, similar state and local consumer credit laws and other regulations at the Owner's and
Architect's principal places of business, the location of the Project and elsewhere may affect the validity of this provision. Specific legal advice should be obtained
with respect to deletions or modifications, and also regarding requirements such as written disclosures or waivers.)
11.5.3 The rates and multiples set forth for Additional Services shall be annually adjusted in accordance with normal salary review
practices of the Architect.
ARTICLE 12
OTHER CONDITIONS OR SERVICES
(Insert descriptions of other services, identify Additional Services included within Basic Compensation and modifications to the payment and compensation terms
included in this Agreement.)
121 1 Landscape Design shall be provided as part of basic services It shall include landscape hardscape and irrigation plan._
12.1.2 - Architect shall assist in development of program for facility._ Architect shall attend up to 8 public meetings as part of Basic
Services Agreement.
�.. 12 1 3 Interior design and the specifications and procurement of Furniture Fixtures & Equipment (FF&E) shall be provided as part
AIA DOCUMENT B 141 - OWNER -ARCHITECT AGREEMENT - FOURTEENTH EDITION - AIA - COPYRIGHT 1987 - THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF
ARCHITECTS, 1735 NEW YORK AVENUE N.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20006-5292.; Unlicensed photocopying violates U.S. copyright laws and is subject to
legal prosecution. This document was electronically produced with the permission of the AIA and can be reproduced without violation until the date of expiration as
noted below.
fel - tM s Electronic Format Blei1-1987
1 IcPr nncumenfi B141-UP.DOC -- 4/24/2001. AIA License Number 100804, which expires on 10/7/2001 -- Page #12
of the basic services. These services will be coordinated with the City.
12.1.4- Site civil engineering shall be provided as part of the basic services, except for owner furnished boundary and topographic
survey and platting. An allowance of $15 000 has been established for civil engineering of the site Should work cost less than this
,irchitect will credit difference to owner.
Nft .
12.1.5- Architect shall co-ordinate the geotechnical investigation of site for owner._ This coordination is part of basic services. the
cost of the Reotechnical report will be reimbursable per section 4.6.
12.1.6 - VOID
12.1.7 - The Architect shall visit the construction site at least twice a month at intervals appropriate to lob site activities regardless of
whether construction is in progress, to become familiar with the progress and quality of the Work complete and to determine if the
Work is being performed in a manner indicating that the Work when completed will be in accordance with the Contract Documents.
Architect shall rn ovide Owner a written report subsequent to each on -site visit._ On the basis of on -site observations as an architect.
the Architect shall keep the Owner informed of the progress and uanti of the Work, and shall exercise the utmost care and
diligence in discovering and promptly reporting to the Owner any defects or deficiencies in the work of the contractor or any_
subcontractors. The Architect represents that he will follow professional standards prevailing in the Dallas/Ft. Worth metroplex area
in performing all services under this _agreement. _ The Architect shall promptly correct any defective designs or specifications
furnished by the Architect at no cost to the Owner.
12.1.8 - The Architect shall not be responsible for the Contractor's schedules or failure to carry out the Work in accordance with the
Contract Documents except insofar as such failure results directly from Architect's negligent acts or omissions.
12.1.9- The Architectb acknowledging payment by the Owner of any fees due, shall not be released from any rights the Owner
may have under the Agreement or diminish any of the Architect's obligations thereunder.
12.1.10 _ - Architect may terminate upon not less than 30 days written notice should the Owner fail substantially to perform in
accordance with the terms of this Agreement through no fault of the Architect. Owner may terminate this agreement through no fault
of the Architect._ Owner may terminate this Agreement or anvphase thereof upon 30 days prior written notice to the Architect with
the understanding that immediately upon receipt of such notice. all work being performed under the Agreement shall cease
immediately. Before the end of the 30 day period, Architect shall invoice the Owner for all work it performed prior to the receipt of
such notice. No amount shall be due for lost or anticipated profits. All plans, field surveys, and other data related to the Proiect shall
become property of the Owner upon termination of the Agreement and shall be promptly delivered to the Owner in a reasonably
organized form. Should Owner subsequently contract with new architect for continuation of services on the Project, Architect shall
cooperate in providing information.
12.1.11 - In the event of termination not the fault of the Architect, the Architect shall be compensated for services properly performed
prior to termination.
12.1.12 - This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Texas. Venue on anv proceeding relating to this Agreement
shall be in Tarrant County, Texas.
12.1.13 - The architect shall provide professional liability insurance for the duration of this proiect in the amount of $500,000.
12.1.14 - The Architect shall provide the owner an electronic file of drawings for Project.
12.1.15 - The Architect shall provide a masterplan of the site to include a library location as part of the basic services.
12.1.16 - Architect shall provide an Enterprise plan as part of the Basic Services. This scope is identified in Attachment'A'.
12.1.17- Architect shall employ a cost consultant as partof the basic services to develop estimates at schematic design and design
development phases of work.
12 1 18 - The principal -in -charge for this proiect will be Dwavne Brinklev and he will maintain his involvement throughout the entire
)roiect.
AIA DOCUMENT B 141 - OWNER -ARCHITECT AGREEMENT - FOURTEENTH EDITION - AIA - COPYRIGHT 1987 - THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF
ARCHITECTS. 1735 NEW YORK AVENUE N.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20006-5292.; Unlicensed photocopying violates U.S. copyright laws and is subject to
legal prosecution. This document was electronically produced with the permission of the AIA and can be reproduced without violation until the date of expiration as
noted below. _
��� I Electronic Format B141-1987
This Agreement entered into as of the day and year first written above.
OWNER
7
(Signature)
(Printed name and title)
ARCHITECT
(Signature)
Dwayne M. Brinkley, Principal
(Printed name and title)
41A DOCUMENT B 141 - OWNER -ARCHITECT AGREEMENT - FOURTEENTH EDITION - AIA - COPYRIGHT 1987 - THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF
ARCHITECTS, 1735 NEW YORK AVENUE N.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20006-5292.: Unlicensed photocopying violates U.S. copyright laws and is subject to
legal prosecution. This document was electronically produced with the permission of the AIA and can be reproduced without violation until the date of expiration as
noted below.
13 " 1 -1 Electronic Format B141-1987
User Document: B141-UP.DOC -- 4/24/2001. AIA License Number 100804, which expires on 10/7/2001 -- Page #14
April 6, 2001
Steve Polasek
City of Southlake
400 N. White Chapel
Southlake, TX 76902
RE: Development of a Community Recreation Center
Dear Mr. Polasek:
BRINKLEY SARGENT ARCHITECTS
We are pleased to share with the City of Southlake the qualifications of Brinkley Sargent
Architects. It appears that our firm is uniquely positioned to help the City of Southlake identify
the needs and demands of a community recreation center and design a facility that incorporates all
the elements required to make it a successful project.
Brinkley Sargent Architects is a twenty-five year old Dallas based firm that has developed
recreational projects for many cities in the Southwest.
Some of the strengths of this team include:
➢ Experience with municipalities — Brinkley Sargent Architects has completed over
ninety Successful public projects.
➢ Experience with Operational and Performance of Facilities — We have completed
numerous studies that predict expenses and revenues for facilities including NRH2O
Waterpark, City of Plano Recreation and Aquatic Center, Coppell Recreation and
Aquatic Center, Rowlett Aquatic Park, and Allen Natatorium. We know how to
develop a business plan for your specific project that will arm you with accurate
information to make informed decisions.
➢ Experience with Recreation Projects — Brinkley Sargent Architects has completed
over 15 recreational projects of various types. We understand the programming and
design requirements for recreational facilities.
➢ Familiarity with this Region — We understand the demands of this region and how
cities have responded to the same issues you are facing. We also understand the
construction cost in this region with having four current projects in different phases
in the Dallas / Ft. Worth Area.
soot �uoxLa
➢ Experience with Citizen Input — We are currently conducting the same survey
process required with your project. The goal is to get accurate dependable
s u : T E
information and allow the citizens to be a part of the process.
DALLAS, TEXAS 73:+tJ
TEL 972 - 96,, - 997U
FAX 972 - 96...1 - �75:
A Te>a5Ccrporar.cn
'58 -) �
Our team is qualified to provide all services required by this project.
Feasibility Study
Community Input Meetings
Business plan for development including staffing description
Design and Construction of Community Recreation facilities
Our team possesses all the experience to lead you through the evaluation and implementation of a
facility that responds to the city's needs.
We are enthusiastic over the possibilities of assisting City of Southlake with the planning and
design process. We hope our response accurately reflects our interest with this exciting project.
Sincerely,
r�
Dwayne Brinkley, AIA
DMB/kg
FIRM PROFILE
Brinkley SargentArchitects is a 25 year -old Dallas based firm specializing inthe development Brinkley SargenlArchitects
of public facilities. This specialization has included both recreational/ sports and public 5000 Quorum Drive, Suite 123
safety project ranging up to $15 million in size. Principals in Brinkley Sargent have directed Dallas, Texas 75240
projects up to $50 million in project size. 972.960.9970
972.960.97 51 Fax
One factor that sets Brinkley Sargent apart from other firms is its ability to understand the
needs of the client and bring together the correct team to address those unique concerns.
An outgrowth of that ability to think 'but -of -the -box" is the development of the expertise
in Aquatic Business Plan developments. There was a need, and we sought to fill that need
with a team of experts. We have now established ourselves as a leader in this unique area
of aquatic planning. Successful projects using this business tool include North Richland
Hills NRH2O Waterpark, Oak Point Recreation and Aquatic Center, Allen Natatorium, and
Coppell Recreation and Aquatic Center.
Having a large part ofourwork in the public sector, our interaction generally involves groups
such as advisory boards, special interest groups, neighborhood associations, instructors,
public corporation (4B) boards, councils, school boards, park boards and other citizens. Our
approach to working with these groups encourages participation and interaction in a focused
manner. Each meeting has a purpose and everyone is encouraged to expand their horizon
and help conceive of new and innovative design possibilities.
To help focus and guide this process, BSA is committed to providing a principal to lead the
team. To this end, a "project delivery" process has been developed to ensure quality control
from start to finish. This process works through a framework of controls at each phase of
the project as well as phase by phase review by the client. The concept behind these technical
controls is to allow maximum freedom of design on each project. Because of this ability,
Brinkley Sargent Architects has been able to establish a proven track record with both
governmental and private clients for creative designs that are within budget and on time.
Brinkley Sargent Architects is fully computerized,utilizing the latest in software and hardware
technology. We utilize design software that allows 3-D imaging for design and AutoCAD
Release 14 for document production. Two in-house Hewlett Packard plotters, one with
color capabilities, expedite our quality control process. This commitment to technology
has provided our clients with a flexible buildingmanagementtoolthat has many applications.
The firm has been fortunate to be honored for design excellence not only by its peers but
also by user groups such as Athletic Business and Texas Parks and Recreation Department.
,.5+3 - �,L
Email 4info@brinkleysargent.com
www.brinklelvsargent.com
Date of Incorporation: 1979
A Texas Corporation
Mr. Brinkley serves as Project Management Principal for Brinkley Sargent
Architects. In addition to his over 25 years of extensive design experience, Mr.
Brinkley also possesses over 11 years of
experience in a project management and
construction management role. This depth of rn�
experience has provided him a unique
perspective into the components of a successful
project. His experience ranges from design of
recreational facilities to master planning of all
city departments. He understands the
architect's role in monitoring construction
budgets and is sensitive to issues that may arise
during the various stages of the project.
Mr. Brinkley has experience on a broad range
of building types ranging from a world class Coppel Recreation Center
velodrome (bicycle racing track), Hospital Addition and Master Plan,
Recreation Facilities, 153-acre Mixed Use Land Development, and Corporate
Headquarters.
He lead the design effort in the development of one of the largest municipally
operated waterparks in the United States at North Richland Hills. He has
taken a leadership role in combining leisure and competitive aquatic elements
for cutting edge facilities in the southwest.
Oak Point Center
He has also completed enterprise plans
(feasibility studies) for several recreation
facilities. These business plans estimate
the costs of running a facility as well as
estimated incomes depending on the
elements planned for the facility.
Because he is also a designer of these
facilities accurate project development
costs can be forecasted for the entire
project.
Certification by National Council of Architectural Registration Board (NCARB)
means Mr. Brinkley can be a Registered Architect in all 50 states along with
his Texas Registration. Professional associations include the American Institute
of Architects and the Health and Management Subcommittee for AIA. He
graduated from Oklahoma State University with Honors with a Bachelor of
Architecture Degree. He has also presented planning seminars at the Texas
Municipal League Convention. He is an active participant of the executive
YMCA Board in Plano.
ID (3 1
RESUME
Dwayne M. Brinkley, AIA
Principal
Brinkley Sargent Architects
Years with Firm: 25
TBAE #: 5518
A selection of recreational facilities are:
Garland Senior Center
Garland, Texas
Mustang Recreation and Aquatic Center
Mustang, Oklahoma
Oak Point Center
Plano, Texas
Coppell Aquatic & Recreation Center
Coppell, Texas
Lee Park Recreation Center
Irving, Texas
Keller Natatorium
Keller. Texas
Allen Natatorium
Allen, Texas
Rowlett Aquatic Park
Rowlett, Texas
McKinney Aquatic Masterplan
:McKinney, Texas
Lakeway Pool Study
Lakeway, Texas
McKinney Aquatic Study
McKinney, Texas
Allen Aquatic Study
Allen, Texas
Superdrome in Frisco
in cooperation with Collin County
Community College
Frisco, Texas
Frito-Lay/Pepsi Youth Ballpark
Plano, Texas
Russell Creek YMCA & Pool
Plano, Texas
Legacy YMCA & Pooi
Plano, Texas
Moseley Pool & Park
Desoto, Texas
North Richland Hills Aquatic Park
(NRH2O)
North Richland Hills, Texas
EXPERIENCE AND REFERENCES
BRINKLEY SARGENT ARCHITECT
Please see Project profiles for complete description and images of these projects
NRH2O Family Waterpark
A 23 acre outdoor family waterpark with new elements added yearly since Team,Wemberswith BSA:
opening. Services provided included: Business Plan (which included feasibility, Counsilman/Hunsaker
programming, staffing analysis and profit and loss), Design and Construction
Administration.
Mr. Bill Thornton
Superintendent of Parks
Citv of North Richland Hills
6720 AB Loop 820
.North Richland Hills, Texas 76180
817-581-5735
Plano Aquatic and Recreation Center (Oakpoint)
A 87,000 SF recreation and aquatic center with gymnasium, gymnastics center, Team !Lfembers with BSA:
classrooms, Indoor 50 meter competition pool, indoor leisure water and outdoor Counsibnan/Hunsaker
leisure water. Services provided included: Business Plan (which included
feasibility, programming, staffing analysis and profit and loss), Design and
Construction Administration.
Mr. Robin Reeves
City of Plano
Parks & Recreation Department
P.O. Box 860358
Plano, Texas 75086-0358
972-461-7250
Coppell Recreation and Aquatic Center
A 3Teani ,Members with BSA:8,000 SF recreation and aquatic center with gymnasium, classrooms, indoor CounsilmardH:unsaker
leisure/lap water and outdoes leisureAap water. Services provided included:
Business Plan (which included feasibility, programming, staffing analysis and
profit and loss), Design and Construction Administration.
Mr. Gary Sims
Department of Leisure Services
City of Coppell
P.O. Box 478
Coppell, Texas 75019
972-462-0022
EXPERIENCE AND REFERENCES
BRINKLEY SARGENT ARCHITECT
Rowlett Family Waterpark
This outdoor family waterpark was designed to complement an existing Team Members with BSA:
community center. Services provided included: Business Plan (which included Counsilman/Hunsaker
feasibility, programming, staffing analysis and profit and loss), Design and -
Construction Administration.
Mr Jim Bowlin
Director of Parks and Recreation
City of Rowlett
P. O. Box 99
Rowlett, Texas 75030
972-412-6146
Allen Natatorium
This 48,000 SF facility will have indoor competition and leisure water for use by Team A -(embers with BSA.
the city and the school district. Services provided included: Business Plan Cotn:silman/Hunsaker
(which included feasibility, programming, staffing analysis and profit and loss),
Design and Construction Administration.
Mr. Don Horton
Director of Parks and Recreation
City of Allen
One Butler Circle
.Allen, Texas 75013
972-727-0100
McKinney Aquatic Park Master Plan Team :Members with BSA-
This 20 acre plus development is part of 100 acre city park. Elements of master Counsilnrac%Flurtsaker
plan included 50,000 SF recreation center, and $10412,000,000 multi -phased
water park. The development of Phase I is planned for 2002 opening. A
business park plan NV111 be developed within the next year.
Mr. Larry Offerdah I
Director of Parks and Recreation
Citv of McKinney
130 South Chestnut Street
McKinney, Texas 75069
972-562-6080
,5i3 -'L3
Arlington Public SafetyBuilding
NaliOnalAL4
Committee on Architecture for Justice, 1992
Bluitl-Flowers Health Center
DallasAL4 Committee on Health, 1992
Women 's Breast and Diagnostic Center
Presbyterian Hospital of Dallas
Texas Society ofArchitects-
Architecturefor Health Committee, 1992
South East Dallas Police Station
Nationa1,41A
Committee on Architecture for Justice, 1993
Paris Regional Cancer Center
North Texas Chapter of the
Associated Builders and Contractors.,1993
West Texas Cancer Center
Texas Downtown Association, 1994
Plano Justice Center
National.41.4
Connrrittee on Architecture forJrrstice, 1994
Longview Cancer Center
Longview News -Journal
Readers Choice Awards, 1994
McCuistion Women 's Pavilion, Paris, Texas
Association of General Contractors -
Dallas, 1995
McCuistion Women 's Pavilion - Paris, Texas
Association of Builders and Contractors -
Dallas, 1995
Longview Cancer Center - Longview, Texas
Modern Healthcare Magazine and
National ALA Committee on Architecture for
Health. 1995
South Texas Cancer Center -
Brownsville, Texas
Association of General Contractors -
Austin, 1995
Longview Cancer Center - Longview, Texas
Texas Architecture for Health Design Awards
Gold Award, 1996
Medical City of Dallas, T O.P.A. Oncology
Center -Dallas, Texas
Texas Architecture for Health Design Awards
BronzeA ward, 1996
NRH20 Water Park -
North Richland Hills, Texas
Texas Recreation and ParkSociety, Inc.
Park Design Excellence Award, 1996
NRH20 Water Park -
North Richland Hills, Texas
Athletic Business
National Award ofIferit, 1996
AWARDS
Arlington Public SafetyBuilding
NationalAIA
Committee on Architecture for Justice
Justice Facilities Review
1992-93
South East Dallas Police Station
NationalAl4
Committee on Architecture for Justice
Justice Facilities Review
1993-94
South East Dallas Police Station
Public Buildings
Texas Architect
3, 4-1993
Bluitt-Flowers Health Center
Healthcare Design
Texas Architect
.i,'6-1993
Plano Justice Center
NAtionalAIA
Committee on Architecture for Justice
Justice Facilities Review
1994-95
North Richland Hills Aquatic Center
Water Parks
Athletic Business News
9-1995, 6-1996
Longview Cancer Center
Award Winning Projects
Modern Healthcare
11-1995
Longview Cancer Center
Project Survey
Texas Architect
112-1996
Longview Cancer Center
Award Winning Projects
Texas Architect
516-1996
Medical City of Dallas, Oncologv Center
Award Winning Projects
Texas Architect
5 6-1996
5�3
PUBLICATIONS
R
BRINKLEY SARGENT ARCHITECTS
a.7 Oyu
This exciting project is being developed
for the City of Plano's growing need
for Aquatic Programs. We developed s .
an enterprise plan which estimated
construction cost as well as operational
costs and expected revenues. We {'
conducted numerous public meetings —r
to gather input on user groups of the - —
facility before we established a U.
program of spaces. Based upon the
programmed spaces we developed a
proposed design and cost estimate for
that design, We further developed
projected revenues of the facility as well as operational costs including staffing.
This enabled the City to determine how they could best operate the facility at
a minimal cost.
The Facility will contain both Aquatic and Recreational components. The
Aquatic side includes an indoor 50 meter pool as well as a 2000 SF recreational
pool. Outside we are developing a 6000 SF leisure pool with access between
the indoor and outdoor areas. The Recreational side will include a double
gym, gymnastics room, weight room, racquetball courts, children's activity
room and classrooms, and meeting rooms.
_�.f•. _•r. Wit:.;• -
PROJECT PROFILE
Plano Aquatic and Recreation Center
Plano, Texas
Role:
Architecture
Site Masterplan
Planning
Programming
Financial Feasibility
Furniture, Furnishings and
Loose Equipment
Specifications
Construction Administration
Project Data:
Indoor 50 Meter Pool and
Recreation Pool
Outdoor Leisure Pool
Recreation Center with Gymnasium,
Track, Racquetball, Gymnastics.
Weight and Classroom Activity Areas
Date Completed: April. 2000
Estimated Dollar
Value at Completion: $12.7 million
Owner:
City of Plano
P.O. Box 860358
Plano, Texas 75086-0358
Contact:
Mr. Robin Reeves
Head of Park Planning
Parks and Recreation
1409 Avenue K
Plano, Texas 75086
972.578.7250
5000 euDeaw
SUITE 123
DALL.AS. TEXAS 75240
972 . 960 - 9970
FAX 972 960 - 975 t
E kl A 1 L 4infordhrinkleysareentxon❑
BRINKLEY SARGENT ARCHITECTS
r
L
ADDITIONAL IMAGES
Plano Aquatic and Recreation Center
Plano, Texas
5000 QUORUM
SUITE 123
DALLAS, TEXAS 75240
972 - 960 - 9970
FAX 972-960-9751
41nfo@brinkleysargent.corn
BRINKLEY SARGENT ARCHITECTS
This project was developed for the growing City of Coppell to meet the citizen
interest for more recreation facilities within their city. Services included
developing estimated cost versus revenue projections as well as the traditional
architectural role of design. The facility contains both family aquatic and
traditional recreation center components in one facility. It was sited adjacent
to a 100 acre park near Town Center.
PR O J ECT P R O F I LE
Coppell Aquatic and Recreation Center
Coppell, Texas
Role:
Enterprise Plan
Architecture
Site Masterplan
Planning
Programming
Financial Feasibility
Furniture, Furnishings and
Loose Equipment
Specifications
Construction Administration
Project Data:
Indoor Leisure/Lap Pool and
Outdoor Leisure Pool
Recreation Center with Gvmnasium.
Track, Cardiovascular Area
and Classroom: Activity Areas
Date Completed: May, 2000
Cost: $7.5 mil
Owner:
City of Coppell
255 Parkway Blvd.
Coppell, Texas 75019
Contact(s):
Mr. Gary Sims
Director of Leisure Services
255 Parkway Blvd.
Coppell, Texas 75019
972.304.3565
5000 QUORUM
SUITE 123
DALLAS, TEXAS 75240
972 - 960 - 9970
FAX 972 - 960 - 9757
EMAIL 4info@brink leysargenLcom
BRINKLEY SARGENT ARCHITECTS
ADDITIONAL IMAGES
Coppell Aquatic and Recreation Center
Coppell, Texas
;r
�d✓
� L(
°
•�..,.� to � ,...
i j
,f,
tom•
5000 QUORUM
SUITE 123
D .ALLAS. TEXAS 75240
972 - 960 - 9970
FAX 972 - 960 - 975 L
4info@hrinkteysargent.com
-I
IN
n
WCA. - LEGACY TOWN CENTER
I. _a_.a, s...
BRINKLEY SARGENT ARCHITECTS
Wc--w60dng ❑ewd:i�n
^•. _- _• � 801+�ky i-argent .3RC??ITFC'!5
Schematic Floor Plan
This YMCA facility is being placed in a corporate environment and is more suited to adult
activities. Areas provided include pool, gymnasium, cardiovascular area, climbing wall,
racquetball courts, aerobics room and juice bar. This facility will be part of a planned
urban community and will have shared use with a nearby hotel.
PROJ E C T PROF] LE
Legacy Park YMCA
Plano, Texas
Role:
Architecture
Design Construction
Site Masterplan
Planning
Programming
Financial Feasibility
Furniture, Furnishings and
Loose Equipment
Specifications
Construction Administration
Project Data:
Project Size:
Est. Date Comple
Cost:
Owner:
Plano KWCA
2601 Glencliff
Plano, Texas 75075
Contact(s):
Mr. Tony Shuman
Executive Director
Plano YWCA
2601 Glencliff
Plano, Texas 75075
972-721-2501
25,000 S.F.
2000
$4,500,000
5000 QUORUM
SUITE 123
DALLAS. TEXAS 75240
972 - 960 - 9970
FAX 972 - 960 - ) 51
E M A I L 41nfo@brinkleysargent.com
i
E
BRINKLEY SARGENT ARCHITECTS
KUSSRL CREEK My
a:
-45
Atd3ermotr Road
IL
i
We developed a plan for a new YMCA to be located in the fast growing section of North
Central Plano. This YMCA has indoor and outdoor pools, double gym, cardiovascular/
weight room, racquetball courts, aerobics room, day care programming spaces and office
areas. The plan was developed to provide for future growth of the Center in a planned
manner.
-31
P ROJ E C T PRO F 1 LE
Russell Creek YMCA
Plano, Texas
Role:
Architecture
Design Construction
Site Masterplan
Planning
Programming
Financial Feasibility
Furniture, Furnishings and
Loose Equipment
Specifications
Construction Administration
Project Data:
Project Size: 40,000 S.F.
Est. Date Complete: 2002
Cost: $5,800,000
Owner:
Plano YMCA
2601 Glencliff
Plano, Texas 75075
Contact(s):
Mr. Tony Shuman
Executive Director
Plano YWCA
2601 Glencliff
Plano, Texas 75075
972-721-2501
5000 QUORUM
SUITE 123
DALLAS, TEXAS 73240
972 - 960 - 9970
FAX 972 - 900 - 975I
E M A I L 4info@brinkleysargent.com
Pq
f
.
BRINKLEY SARGENT ARCHITECTS
PROJECT PROFILE
Mustang Community Center
Mustang, Oklahoma
Role:
Needs Assessment
Site Masterplan
Furniture, Furnishings and
Loose Equipment
Specifications
'y Construction Admiristration
_. Project Data:
Project Size: 57,000 SF
Date Completed. 2001
Construction Cost: $7,500,000
--.- Components:
Community Center, Recreation, Senior Center
~' Library, Meeting Rooms, Aquatics, Ball Fields
-- Owner:
The concept was to develop an open town square with a mix of public and
commercial development around it. Nearby are areas for multi -family
housing in a more urban design with parking lots hidden behind the units.
The centerpiece of this development would be the Community Center, which
will include a recreation center, library, senior center and meeting/reception
space, Exterior recreation areas for family aquatics and a four-plex
tournament level softball complex.
City of Mustang
135 N. Mustang Road
Mustang, Oklahoma 73064
Contact(s):
Huey P. Long
City Manager
City of Mustang
135 N. Mustang Road
Mustang, Oklahoma 73064
405-376-4521
5000 QUORUM(
SUITE 123
DAI"LAS. TEXAS 75240
972 - 960 - 9970
FAX 972 - 960 - 475 1
BRINKLEY SARGENT ARCHITECTS
tr:- tl
I �AOI
. tabby
Lid►`{ . -
tobby yytt��. �,y,ta I(uer �iaang� �tse.
Sn;r. Olt. 0" 011.
L
Ke at. oll. w,>i I co.l,d. i
• W Room \; . .-
Cry raywm
This expansion to a "starter unit" in the fast growing
section of McKinney will provide indoor aquatics,
gymnasium, cardiovascular/weight room, and ex-
panded babysitting. The site is elevated with ex-
panded views to the west overlooking the Stonebridge
Tennis and Beach Club.
PROJECT PROFILE
McKinney YMCA
McKinney, Texas
Role:
Architecture
Design Construction
Site Masterplan
Planning
Programming
Financial Feasibility
Furniture, Furnishings and
Loose Equipment
Specifications
Construction Administration
Project Data:
Project Size: 25,000 S.F.
Est. Date Complete: 2002
Cost: $3,500,000
Owner:
Plano YMCA
2601 Glencliff
Plano, Texas 75075
Contact(s):
Mr. Tony Shuman
Executive Director
Plano YMCA
2601 Glencliff
Plano, Texas 75075
972-721-2501
5000 QUORUM
SUITE 123
DALLAS. TEXAS 75240
972 - 960 - 9970
FAX 972 960 975i
E M A I L 4irf0 brinkieysargent.com
City of Southlake, Texas
MEMORANDUM
April 26, 2001
TO: Billy Campbell, City Manager
FROM: Kevin Hugman, Director of Community Services (x1527)
SUBJECT: Resolution No. 01-021, Certification of Funding and Support and Intent for TIP
Placement for City of Southlake 2001 TxDOT S.T.E.P. Funding Reimbursement
Application for F.M. 1709 Trail
Action Requested: City Council approval of Resolution No. 01-021, Certification of Funding and
Support and Intent for TIP Placement for City of Southlake 2001 TxDOT
S.T.E.P. Funding Reimbursement Application for F.M. 1709 Trail.
Background
Information: TxDOT, through the North Central Texas Council of Governments
(NCTCOG), has issued the 2001 Call for Projects for Statewide Transportation
Enhancement Program (STEP) funding. This program is not a grant; it is an
80/20 cost reimbursement program based on a 12-category project eligibility
list. Candidate projects must have been through the public approval process
and have a demonstrable funding source established, since the total project cost
must first be borne by the nominating entity. Successful applications have
typically been within the range of $100,000 minimum to anywhere between
$1,000,000 and $2,000,000 as a general maximum. As such, it becomes fairly
obvious that Southlake's options are limited to the Traffic Management Bond
(TMB) program improvements.
Staff has met and discussed the possible options with Public Works and
representatives from the Park Board. Two projects seem particularly suited to
this funding request and are included for the following reasons:
1. TMB Bid Package No 2A, F.M. 1709 from Pearson to S.H. 114,
excluding Package No. 2B and N. Kimball to S.H. 114 (by others) — This
project's cost estimate comes in just over a million dollars, a recommended
range by TxDOT for likely funding candidates. It is also attractive in that it
makes the required logical trail connections and has a regional significance.
Also, any funding already commenced (i.e. Package No. 2B) at the time of
this award several months from now would be ineligible, and No. 2A
appears to be on schedule to have the timing just about right to match the
award period.
2. _North Carroll/S.H. 114 Pedestrian Lane and Additional Bridte Width:
In 1997, the City of Southlake committed $150,000 by letter agreement
with TxDOT during design stages to construct an additional pedestrian
(separated from traffic lanes) lane on the bridge on North Carroll where the
S.H. 114 reconstructed highway will go under. Staff recommended
submitting this application to be reimbursed for that expense when we
transfer the funds in the future.
i
cm
City Council Meeting — May 1, 2001
April 26, 2001
Page 2
Financial
Considerations: Numerous, though no unfunded request is being made. TMB debt would be
issued at previously approved amounts in lieu of S.T.E.P. application not being
selected. Any award of TxDOT funding will allow TMB bonded indebtedness
to be reduced or funds transferred to other TMB projects.
Citizen Input/
Board Review: Prior bond program campaign. Staff meetings with Public Works and
representatives of the Park Board. Staff meetings with HNTB.
Legal Review: Not applicable at this time. If awarded funding, contract with TxDOT will be
reviewed by City Attorneys.
Alternatives: Limited. Open to discussion by Council.
Supporting
Documents: Supporting documents include the following items:
• S.T.E.P. Funding Applications for two projects previously mentioned.
Staff
Recommendation: City Council approval of Resolution No. 01-021, Certification of Funding and
Support and Intent for TIP Placement for City of Southlake 2001 TxDOT
S.T.E.P. Funding Reimbursement Application for F.M. 1709 Trail.
KH/cic
S-C' 2
Rev. 12/00
NOMINATION FORM - 2001
STATEWIDE TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM
I. PROJECT NAME City of Southlake — F.M. 1709 Pathway Construction Package #2A
II. NOMINATING ENTITY
NAME City of Southlake, Texas
TYPE OF NOMINATING ENTITY. Please check the appropriate category.
❑ County X City ❑ An Agency of the State ❑ Local Transit Operator ❑ State Agency
❑ Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) ❑ Council of Governments
CONTACT PERSON: Chris Carpenter, City of Southlake
(Individual familiar with the project and who can answer questions)
TITLE Senior Park Planner
MAILING ADDRESS 400 N. White Chapel Blvd.
CITY Southlake STATE Texas ZIP CODE 76092
DAYTIME TELEPHONE 817-481-1585 FAX No. 817-481-1594
EMAIL ccarpenter@ci.southlake.tx.us
Signature Date
AN AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE NOMINATING ENTITY MUST SIGN THE
NOMINATION FORM.
III. SPONSORING ENTITY (If Applicable). Sponsoring Entities must be willing to commit to the
project's development and implementation.
NAME City of Southlake
CONTACT PERSON Chris Carpenter, AICP
TITLE Senior Park Planner
MAILING ADDRESS 400 N. White Chapel Blvd.
CITY Southlake STATE Texas ZIP CODE 76092
DAYTIME TELEPHONE 817-481-1585 FAX No 817-481-1594
EMAIL ccarpenter@ci.southlake.tx.us
Rev. 12/00
IV. PROJECT ELIGIBILITY. The proposed project must have a direct relationship to the surface
�+ transportation system by Function or Impact. Please check only one box.
X FUNCTION ❑ IMPACT
V. ELIGIBLE CATEGORIES Check only one category in which the project has a primary
activity.
X 1. Provision of Facilities for Pedestrians and Bicycles
❑ 2. Provision of Safety and Education Activities for Pedestrians and Bicycles
❑ 3. Acquisition of Scenic Easements and Scenic or Historic Sites
❑ 4. Scenic or Historic Highway Program
(including the provision of tourist and welcome center facilities)
❑ 5. Landscaping and other Scenic Beautification
❑ 6. Historic Preservation
❑ 7. Rehabilitation and Operation of Historic Transportation Buildings, Structures or
Facilities (including historic railroad facilities and canals)
❑ 8. Preservation of Abandoned Railway Corridors
(including the conversion and use thereof for pedestrian or bicycle trails)
❑ 9. Control & Removal of Outdoor Advertising
❑ 10. Archaeological Planning & Research
❑ 11. Environmental Mitigation of Water Pollution due to Highway Runoff or Reduce
Vehicle -caused Wildlife Mortality while Maintaining Habitat Connectivity
❑ 12. Establishment of Transportation Museums
VI. PREVIOUS ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM PROJECTS
Has this project been submitted in previous Transportation Enhancement Program calls?
❑ Yes X No
Is this project a part of another previously selected Transportation Enhancement project?
❑ Yes X No
If yes, please describe.
2
Rev. 12/00
VII. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION
Project Location: Southlake, Texas COUNTY Tarrant
TxDOT District(s): Fort Worth
Project Limits: F.M. 1709 from Keller city limits to Hwy. 114
Project length (miles), if applicable: 4.62
Detailed Scope of Work. Provide a clear concise description of the proposed project. Detail all work to be
performed, any right-of-way or easements required, any special land uses planned and the relationship between the
proposed enhancement and the surface transportation systein. Include a detail map showing the limits and location of
the project, photographs and site plans.
The City of Southlake is situated in the rapidly growing northeast Tarrant County, just north of
D/FW International Airport,. between Dallas and Fort Worth. Traffic volume has steadily increased
on the main east -west regional route through town, F.M. 1709, which was reconstructed to state
standards in 1990 without the provision for pedestrian access on either side of the roadway. The
right-of-way is an existing 130' (variable). A 1999 bond election was overwhelmingly approved to
fund non -motorized access on 1709 (and other local roadways), and that process is set to begin. As
the city began to issue the debt in stages and complete the designs for these initial trails, a year-
long Trail System update has been reviewed and approved which showed additional trails in the
city, and even on F.M. 1709.
It is the city's desire to implement the previously approved and designed plans with, at least in
part, funding through TxDOT" s S.T.E.P. program. This would take advantage of prior segments
under construction and/or already built by new developments to complete the F.M. 1709 system,
ahead of schedule, easing the complete lack of non -motorized access through the heart of the city
to a new Town Hall complex (including Tarrant County offices and that of State Representative
Vicki Truitt), a major recreational park, Carroll High School, and destination shopping, not to
mention connecting two cities (Keller and Grapevine across S.H. 114).
The project calls for construction of a new 8-foot pathway, including necessary culverts,
pedestrian bridges, railings, retaining walls, and pedestrian -friendly enhancements from Pearson
Lane on the Southlake/Keller border to existing development -constructed trails beginning at N.
Kimball and going all the way to S.H. 114. All right-of-way use agreements (with TxDOT) and
any easements have already been obtained. The preliminary engineering has also been completed.
VIII. PROJECT TIME LINE. Provide an implementation plan for the proposed project, including a schedule of
project activities.
May 1, 2001 — Southlake City Council resolution approving funding commitment
May 4, 2001 —Project application to NCTCOG
June, 2001 — Design Plans approved by TxDOT (currently under review)
Late Summer 2001 — Project Bid (possible)
Bid award and commence of construction (possible - pending funding application acceptance)
3
Rev. 12/00
IX. PROJECT USE AND BENEFITS. Clearly define who will benefit from the project and how. Describe
1%r how the project will improve social, economic and environmental aspects of the area, region or state. Describe how
the project relates to the surface transportation system and what activities in the project complement the movement of
people and goods.
Southlake citizens stand to benefit the most from the implemented pathway segments, but upon
program completion, the system will take on complimentary regional use, as the non -motorized
alternative becomes a viable east -west route for many transportation and recreational needs. Fuel
otherwise consumed and pollutants otherwise omitted to take non -driving children to the Carroll
High School (and at least three other schools immediately north and south of these pathways), to
Bicentennial Park, a new proposed Recreation Center and future Library site, and to Town Hall,
won't be, improving the NCTCOG area ozone non -attainment goals. Local businesses will enjoy
the benefits of alternative local trips that will not increase congestion and will help to keep the
region attractive for new businesses. Clean, tax -generating corporate offices, both existing (Sabre,
Fidelity, etc.)and expected along the S.H. 114 corridor, will add selling points to attract their
prospective employees, increasing the area's portfolio of amenities. This diversification of travel
where none exists today will fully compliment TxDOT's existing roadway systems in every
possible way.
4
Rev. 12/00
X. ITEMIZED BUDGET. List the estimated cost for each work activity. An accurate and itemized budget will
help define the scope of work proposed in the project. Only those approved items of work and cost estimates
established in the nomination form will be eligible for federal funding participation. Contingency costs are not
eligible for participation. Include: Preliminary Engineering, Environmental Costs, Real Property Costs, and
Construction Costs.
CONSTRUCTION FUNDING COSTS
(F.M. 1709, 24,410 linear feet — excluding prior construction)
Item/Description
Quantity
Unit Price
Amount
Excavation (268,510 sq. ft. at 6" depth)
4973 CY
$2.00
$9,946
Tree Removal
15 EA
$150.00
$2,250
Asphalt Removal (4,257 sq. ft.) — existing driveways
473 SY
$4.25
$2,010
Concrete Removal (7,560 sq. ft.) — existing driveways
840 SY
$2.00
$1,680
Concrete Curb Removal — at trail crossings
560 LF
$4.10
$2,296
6" Concrete Curb Taper
138 LF
$13.00
$1,794
5" Reinforced Concrete Trail, 8' Wide (24,410 LF)
195,280 SF
$4.25
$829,940
Modular Block Retaining Wall With Footing (2018 LF)
5045 SFF
$30.00
$151,350
Concrete Retaining Wall at Headwall (254 LF)
508 SFF
$32.00
$16,256
Reinforced Concrete Apron
3791 SF
$3.50
$13,269
Pedestrian Bridge (30 LF and 8' Wide Clear w/ Railings)
1 EA
$21,000
$21,000
Metal Guard Railing
254 LF
$68.00
$17,272
ADA Accessibility Ramps
70 EA
$300.00
$21,000
Adjust top of manhole, valve, signal boxes, etc.
48 EA
$500.00
$24,000
Adjust existing water meter
3 EA
$650.00
$1,950
Reset Mailboxes
14 EA
$150.00
$2,100
Relocate Small Signs
16 EA
$285.00
$4,560
Irrigation
690 SF
$0.25
$173
4" Topsoil With Bermuda Grass Sod (18" either side trail)
8137 SF
$4.00
$32,548
Tree Protection Fencing
350 LF
$6.00
$2,100
Sub -Total
$1,157,493
XI. FUNDS REQUESTED
Total Itemized Budget (from page 5) 1. $ 1,157,493
In -Kind Contributions (If applicable):
Real Property $ N/A
Materials $ N/A
Preliminary Engineering (Limited to10% of the project cost) $ N/A (completed)
*Total In -Kind Contributions 2. $ 0.00
Subtotal Value of Project (Line 1 + Line 2) 3. $ 1,157,493
TxDOT Administrative Expenses (20% of line 3) 4. $ 231,499
Total Value of Project (Line 3 + Line 4) 5. $ 1,388,992
Local Match:
20% of Total Value of Projects (Line 5) 6. $ 277,798
Less In -Kind Contributions (Line 2) 7. $ 0.00
Local Match (Line 6 less Line 7) 8. $ 277,798
Federal Funds Requested (80% of Line 5) 9. $ 1,111,194
�w *All donations must provide supporting documentation
This space for TxDOT use only
0
Rev. 12/00
Rev. 12/00
XII. COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT. Include documentary evidence of public interest,
endorsement and participation in the development of the proposed project. Provide dates of
public meetings and any letters of support.
1. 1995 Trail System Master Plan
2. 1999 Bond Election — Final Vote, Council Minutes, Newspaper Articles
3. 2001 Trail System Master Plan
4. Southlake City Council Resolution of Funding Support and Minutes of May 1, 2001 meeting
5. Letters of support from Brian Stebbins, Town Square; State Representative Vicki Truitt;
Tarrant County Commissioner Glen Whitley. (if solicitation of support approved by Council)
XIII. PROPERTY ACQUISITION INFORMATION
Will Property be acquired for the project? DYES _X NO
If yes, provide a written statement from the current property owner stating their willingness to sell, lease or donate
the property, the fair market value, and a description of the property
Who owns the property? TxDOT (trails provided within TxDOT R.O.W.)
Describe how the property is to be acquired (through purchase, lease or donation), including estimated current fair
market value and proposed funding arrangements, if applicable.
N/A (previously executed R.O.W. Use Agreements)
XIV. MAINTENANCE. Identify all parties responsible for operation and maintenance of the projects, the estimated
annual cost to operate and maintain the facility, the source of those funds, and all expected operational income from
the facility and the intended use of that income.
The City of Southlake assumes all maintenance of the pathway as outlined in previously executed
R.O.W. Use Agreements with TxDOT. The annual estimated maintenance cost is $XX,000 and
will be funded through the City of Southlake's General Fund.
XV. ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECT IMPACTS. Describe the environmental consequences of the proposed
project and how the proposed project will comply with all applicable local, state and federal environmental laws,
regulations and requirements.
Not applicable.
7
Rev. 12/00
XVI. PERMITS AND CLEARANCES
Navigational Permits (Section 10)
Yes No X
Section 404 Permits (Wetland Regulations)
Yes
No
X
Section 106 Clearance (Archeological and Historical Studies)
Yes
No
_X_
National Pollution Discharge Elimination System
Yes
No
_X_
Section 4F (Historical Studies/Parks)
Other
Yes No
Yes No
XVII. CERTIFICATION OF FUNDING AND SUPPORT
This document should be labeled - CERTIFICATION OF FUNDING AND SUPPORT
(Included and so titled as part of City of Southlake Resolution #00-021)
XVIII. INTENT FOR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PLAN (TIP) PLACEMENT
This document should be labeled - INTENT FOR TIP PLACEMENT
r (Included and so titled as part of City of Southlake Resolution #00-021)
XIV. DETERMINATION OF ELIGIBILITY FOR THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF
HISTORIC PLACES (if applicable)
Not applicable.
AN ORIGINAL AND 12 COPIES OF THE COMPLETED
NOMINATION FORM MUST BE SUBMITTED TO A
TXDOT DISTRICT OFFICE BY
5:00 P.M., JUNE 18, 2001
ATTACHMENT A
Project Map, Photographs, and Plans
City of Southlake denoted by red star
AFK. 11. 1UU1 1:3IAM NU. Udi Y. 1
Attachment A
Project Maps, Photographs, and Plans
w
�
y.
O
Q
�
�
W
O
o
g
m
�
N
06
U
m
¢
x�Q�
O� V
O
Li
�
U
�
LL
N Q�
4
O
u
/�
�L N
UJ N
J_
N
tn-
CD
'• W
aCD r °d
CD
N
W
� • `
s
\\l1
� N
A0 30V d
Attachment A
Project Maps, Photographs, and Plans
-I r
r
O-
T1
n:
C
M:
Co-
cn
ZZ
U)
�m=
CD
a
r
LA
m
• •fin
2
�
T • . �
I�
Ca
v
'CD n
n••�cc . rr_'•. •� �
y/TFCT'�ya
C
11
Z
C
' *
CO
n o
x g
n
W
O
o
m
(n O
O
J
REVISIONS
;`
m
z m
O
2
Q 3
N w a Ln o+ � m
I
m�
A [wig
C
.C-�I
Q°
CD
—i _
D
o
y
sc�i
=
_
1
z
W m
-Di
m
CO
O
_
r.o
4
=
Cn
Q
M
N
m
D
Co
i
m
�
o
-
v
< -�
o
M
xrTl
Z
(D
D
a
3
r
CCn
-
I
v
L
O
Cn
Attachment B
Documentation of Community Support
`mac o
5.
y o 34 y� Cd o o °'
mow' ��3•,.oCd
�-�� COpE RM�Q�za>y°.b�pcxi >�x
-C O p a� o E-' a� Ey E 5 a�
Cz
IV aaax�lD3.�box °°'Qay
-_o �.
CU
x bn
a°i b o y o voi . c� rn
° C 6 U ci [�. G3 d Cam.
OE-+ y c� O A 0" cd = � +�, ^� x � c6 m C En 'b
+� cC O r: G a� 6 �' x�. Q -0 Cd
"Ift)
n
W
O
43 Cd Cd Cd
00 C �w� O
w ao
sul a �
° CQ) Q)
� .0 �b�y G
-o b q) —O Q), � o
Cd sz 4j � o
w.. ° a�"i m bn - sty
3t, c,a,o cd•..
bD w U 0 CC
Cd
0� O0'0'° C
C" Q
x a) Cd "a CO 4 :J
as ao r. w.,,x
cdo`"``-oa)
r�rn+�oo�a.
O O ' O Cd ' Cd 0
0
q co
..a�F
a):-1. ��ai�
'w
�Cd
°3� t
0
oM pox
°
�C)
° 3
CJ ° `� �•
.d o
cd F (
y
13 't7 D
Cs .�.�
�
a a 4.2
O
Cz b0
0
� n
�'b�o
o
V
Cd v
Oa
a
O
cd Q +a Cd
..� G� >
W CZ V] CO -4j.
a) Q
E! lz
c
43 p w
F�>�x'tic
�dca�-o
x
vR, .N
Cd c°, ° Ey W
w C8
►+ q
0
n
o
� ''
Cd
�
��oF" M;�
ab
N�'p"�
eta
adC4 0 qq A
Nc.�
P.
o v
c jai
d
C E-+ p U
bo rn b�""
bn
b4 0.- � � A.
A cc`ern
3,�
bA,��,^� r Q
�4.4.
"o
0 F rn
_Q ca
o p
a O v ° �'
o:n
° �bA
0 'p
MF.Q),-
a���
�o�COaa)
..z
m w
Q)a41a1ia)0
c°E
o�E
ay b >
ir.W�'yy
o ao
�,,'[
a
c.s� , lz
>•
Attachment B q - ' }
Documentation of Community Support
Source: M mn i n ' ��� Date:
1
� outhlake gives loon0 1
orum on road plan
!ssion taped for cable with sole audience member
y Steve Miller
I Writer of The Dallas Morning News
SOUTHLAKE — While traffic is
aking it increasingly hard to get
ound town, Roger Porto . found
mself with plenty of breathing
om this week at a presentation on
e city's proposed $24.2 million
ad bond program.
At a public meeting Monday
ght — the first of two planned by
e city to explain the intricacies of
e bond and answer questions
Din residents — only Mr. Porto
.owed up at Johnson Elementary
he
Iv. .rto, who moved to South-
ke six years ago from New Jersey,
id he attended because his 16-
�ar-old son had begun driving just
last week. Mr. Porto wanted to en-
sure that the three -proposition road
bond package, which goes to voters
on May 1, would make for safe.,
travel in the future.
"They've got to do something o.
they're going to have a parking to
here worse than New York City,
Mr. Porto said.
If the bond proposal is approve
— and there's no organized oppos
tion so far — the money would b
spent on widening key intersef
tions, enhancing state -funded cot
struction on State Highway 114 an
building walking and biking trail,
Southlake has spent nearly S
million buying property so that 11_
can be expanded. Expansion of thi
SOUTHLAKE BOND PACKAGE AT A GLANCE
Following are the three
propositions that together make
up Southlake's $24.2 million bond
package:
■ Proposition i — $17.29 million
for intersection improvements
■ Proposition 2 — $2,15 million
for Highway 114 construction
enhancements
■ Proposition 3 — $4.73 million
for trail improvements
SOURCE City of Southlake
Please see SOUTHLAKE on Page 2rSouthlake
Following are the goals of
Southlake's proposed Traffic
Management Bond PrograrTf, ,
■ Provide safer intersections'
along state roadways
■ Provide more convenient >
access onto state highways
■ Further enhance State Highway
114 improvements
■ Provide means for safe
pedestrian and bicyclist traffic"
The Dallna Morning New
'ves 1 ow.
Forum on road plan',,"'..:
Continued from Page 1N.
ighway, which is currently two
anes in each direction from Roa-
ioke to Grapevine, is scheduled to
tegin early next year. The road will
!ventually become a six -lane divid-
d throughway that bisects the 22-
quare-mile Southlake.
Monday's meager attendance
lidn't stop city officials from video -
aping a narrated slide presenta-
ion, which will be broadcast on the
Dcal cable access channel.
If the performance was a bit
rooden, it's understandable. The
chool's auditorium echoed with
'ity Manager Curtis Hawk's open-
ag as he addressed the camera —
nd Mr. Porto.
The bond plan would not require
tax increase, said Bob Whitehead,
the city's public works director.
The city's projected population
growth stemming from an antici-
pated 600 new homes this year
alone, as well as the probability of
sizable new commercial i)roiects,
"By making improvements to
these intersections, which is where
most congestion takes place, we're
hoping to delay the ultimate'build-
ing of streets between Highway 114
and [FM] 1709," Mr. Whitehead said.
"It would be some time bef0e we
had to do that."
Those improvements would in-
clude adding "deceleration' lanes"
— portions of road that giveAraffic
room to slow down before Aurning
from the busy highway' onto
FM1709. „
Southlake has almost tripled in
population this decade, from' 7,500
people to nearly 21,000. This 'will be
the city's first bond election since
1992, when voters approved $4.5, mil-
lion for street improvements by. a
2-to-1 ratio.
The Southlake Program for the
Involvement of Neighborhoods
(known as SPIN) has scheduled an-
other public meeting for April 13 at
the Senior Activity Center: ... __ .
Steve Miller can be contacted via
Attachment B
Documentation of Community Support
00
3 °
00
n O Y s, LS N y cd
c0• y U 'O N n v�i O O N +- (7 U In i� cd O
C) Vol`n V v N� O O Cz M ^Cy y O O CU .b N O C
H OU O y O D\ y0 o 'd O 'O C) l�
o , I^ v 4. V ' ' I op U 1-0 4. v3
y 0 y CIS 4. O Oo Y cOi o a�
V)�� o�oti� ��Cz ��'o a� Cd
s. r O OCZ
O O O H 04 ^�, ¢, - O Q ' .0 `" tr" cad
�.
°v H,A E oar Cl -� 1) E 3� Z
O>, .0 N N cad C� U 4,
�• U O
V _ems ° �' $°�Y�,oEn b03 —C's w
4 p7 a4 .d U 0 Cd� O O v� O b �� En
� 'd Cd
—14 E-.=i� a�U a o3�a��
C's'as
o �� °i� 0 � �3 a� �4. bpi o o a
O i OCeO P. O cd N
���•1•�,,con bAC/) cc &n O Q
Cz-b � 0 C O
C,3 to
t Nbl) U N Co cd
0 ►�rw x °rig-14 En
'►Z'', Q N O CdCo
G� w" Cd0^3;3ob3�' °
C.. — V. " o Q., S -n � U Cd W �
Attachment B
Documentation of Community Support
RS
y I
�
.no�o
y
�3•L��
_3
U
Cn
Cz
Cn
y
+- « S
o��c°U
N
Q
°� U 3
'�
O U
C
f3,
N •�• � N
U Cz Cz
• i. U
S." U
tUr N ."� V
Co O O "d ❑ Y
U bA
O 'C7 N to U
3Cz.a �
Ct
O
(1)
Ct
O U
C
ac.oj
C .
°
o�
w s.
Cl, O O.
�
U -O
•i O � .�
.�
cc
�
O
(L) >
c0 UU
en
c
N
C4 O
m i
� O '�
+4;
y U
O U 'v >
C C Cz
Cn
a) Q y U Q
C
O y y
r
Cz
G, �
y
(U
ea
Cz
O y i
_°
N
U��•c
0
M e
y G.
i O y
on Cl,
i
ctko
'v N y c—C y 'b N C) 1 V ••p ^p >, C N �•+ 'O bA
Un CZ as Cz
UUo UU°-, °.C... �wa�TJ 3� CUE-X a0i
N O O C4 y bA U .L U ..-� H E-� y 'b ca
w O
y
U �^ t, ° i, O U CC N U aG _� C W E
N C f1 N .. n+... Q y C', E.Cz C,C •� .,
0cqs Cl
o Cz y `° CZ > M U O V ., ..�'"•i � V
..� -o a U Ll W � 3 F� a.•; ° ao.� 3 .� ° w°
3~�
�
$ UCd
�•s.ti•�
ate,
C7 '* O U 4w +•+'�
^I
•°
' n C)
o�yti0
0,0 • •-� O
••.V•� ' —
�Ui
C-]
•.yi O y
� � o � ° 3
O M.
N
,O v°i � U
'p
_
cd C'C
y . bQ
cd
N
4
.
E" M U
.°OIn
a,
O
N � ~
O�
4.
4.
O
C^y
cd
Cd
69 .0
bC 'L7
U -O
y r
y+
Ey ��.
O cd
3
m
Ca
C4 w
to
o a
W
U a M
cd
Cn
ob
° N
ti c
N
.�
23
0
o yw
0 ~'w
A cca
-
. V.
Attachment B
` W1 Source:
Documentation of Community Support
Date:
SoutlAake bond plan goes
By Raymon D. Fullerton III
Staff Writer
Southlake voters will decide
the fate of a bond package Sat-
urday that is designed to fund
$24.17 million in street and trail
improvements.
City officials said approval of
the package will not .result in a
tax increase.
Voters have been given three
propositions:
— PROPOSITION 1 asks vot-
ers to authorize the issuance of
$17.3 in general obligation bonds
for street improvements. Offi-
cials said this proposition would
fund work at several major in-
tersections in the city.
— PROPOSITION 2 would
authorize the issuance of $2.15
million in general obligation
bonds for design enhancements
for Texas 114 intersections
— PROPOSITION 3 would
authorize the issuance of $4.73
million in general obligation
bonds for new hike -and -bike
trails.
Officials said Proposition 1
would fund improvements to the
Dove Road -Texas 114 intersec-
tion and the intersection of White
Chapel and Texas 114.
. The proposition would also
fund improvements to several
intersections on Southlake
Boulevard. Major streets affected
would be Pearson Lane, Randol
Mill Avenue, Peytonville Ave-
nue, South -ridge Lakes Parkway,
Shady Oaks Drive, White Chapel
Boulevard, Byron Nelson Park-
way/Diamond Boulevard, Car-
roll Avenue, Central Avenue,
Village Center Drive, Kimball
Avenue and Commerce Street.
Proposition 1 would allow the
to voters
placement of deceleration lanes
along Southlake Boulevard at
several streets.
Proposition 2 would fund proj-
ects designed to enhance inter-'
sections affected by the widen-
ing of Texas 114. City officials
want Southlake's 5-mile stretch
of Texas 114 to be unique, and
they are asking voters to fund
improvements that would add
special touches to the construc-
tion performed by the state.
Proposition 3 would supply
money for the major "spines" of
the city's Trail System Master
Plan. A trail along the entire
length of Southlake Boulevard
and another trail extending from
Ira E. Woods Avenue near the
Cotton Belt train tracks north
to Bob Jones Park would be built.
Polling Place is Jack D.
Johnson Elementary School,
1301 North Carroll Avenue,
Southlake.
Attachment B
IM
Documentation of Community Support
N �
• pq y N -.. � c�
eo6�•o
.� N Q
.0 3 bUA g � =
U-B oQO
x 3 3
V1 q O N FA C�+�
0.0 U �U�.,^QaC (r U
• �� ai O �0 Kam_ U x U O U
N O � � N •-" �' 'C � G�
^O w y 4; N y
?.�- � � �° 3 r� U •3 � °o
\ O OQ ' C o O
°°•�o3'd� 3��v
O n �pq a �w O
N N by vi b O
l/�J ❑❑ 00
� 3
N lC �?
w
4) C 0 0 0 O
0.0 O y
> rr
Or O z In.NUi, 2 >
�� I •~ a�
Z �W W O a>
W
Q 14
Cd N ! S
I:) ��S
V o o °
� �b
W
Z
RESOLUTION NO. 01-021
CERTIFICATION OF FUNDING SUPPORT
And
INTENT FOR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PLAN (TIP)
PLACEMENT
A RESOLUTION BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS APPROVING THE SUBMITTAL OF AN
APPLICATION TO THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION STATEWIDE TRANSPORTATION
ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM (S.T.E.P.) FOR A PROJECT
NOMINATION PROVIDED BY THE TRANSPORTATION
EQUITY ACT FOR THE 21s' CENTURY;
AND,
RECOGNIZING THAT THE METROPOLITAN PLANNING
ORGANIZATION (MPO) POLICY COMMITTEE IS CERTIFYING
INTENT FOR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PLAN (TIP)
PLACEMENT FOR PROJECTS FUNDED BY THE FISCAL YEAR
2001 STATEWIDE TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENT
PROGRAM.
WHEREAS, the City Council of Southlake, Texas desires to submit an
application for the development of. (1) FM 1709 Path Improvements (Bid Package No.
2A, FM 1709 from Pearson to SH 114, excluding Package No. 2B and N. Kimball to SH
114; and (2) North Carroll/SH 114 Pedestrian Lane and Additional Bridge Width); and
WHEREAS, the above -mentioned projects will have regional significance for
users; and
WHEREAS, the city desires to establish its commitment to pledge the 20%
match in accordance with the Texas Transportation Enhancement Program guidelines;
and
Attachments C and D
C — Resolution for Funding Support
D — Intent for TIP Placement
Resolution No. 01-021
May 1, 2001
Page 2
WHEREAS, the Transportation Efficiency Act for the 21 st Century provides for a
transportation enhancement program and the Texas Department of Transportation has
issued a program call for this program; and
WHEREAS, federal guidelines require that projects selected for federal funding
under the transportation enhancement program must be placed in the Transportation
Improvement Program (TIP) of the Metropolitan Planing Organization; and
WHEREAS, Southlake, Texas has applied for funding through the Statewide
Transportation Enhancement Program and the city commits to the projects' development,
implementation, construction, maintenance and financing:
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS:
SECTION 1
That the above mentioned projects selected for statewide enhancement program
funding by the Texas Transportation Commission will be placed in the appropriate
Transportation Improvement Program for Southlake Metropolitan Planning Organization
SECTION 2
This resolution shall become effective on the date of approval by the City
Council.
'r..
Resolution No. 01-021
May 1, 2001
Page 3
PASSED AND APPROVED THIS DAY OF , 2001.
CITY OF SOUTHLAKE
ATTEST:
Sandra L. LeGrand
City Secretary
NA\Parks & Recreation\Resolutions\01-021-STEP Funding App.doc
Rick Stacy, Mayor
Rev. 12/00
NOMINATION FORM - 2001
STATEWIDE TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM
I. PROJECT NAME: City of Southlake — N. Carroll Avenue Pedestrian Lane on S.H. 114 Bridge
II. NOMINATING ENTITY
NAME City of Southlake, Texas
TYPE OF NOMINATING ENTITY. Please check the appropriate category.
County X City An Agency of the State Local Transit Operator State Agency
Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) Council of Governments
CONTACT PERSON: Chris Carpenter, City of Southlake
(Individual familiar with the project and who can answer questions)
TITLE Senior Park Planner
MAILING ADDRESS 400 N. White Chapel Blvd.
CITY Southlake STATE Texas ZIP CODE 76092
DAYTIME TELEPHONE 817-481-1585 FAX No. 817-481-1594
EMAIL ccarpenter(a'Dci.southlake.tx.us
Signature Date
AN AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE NOMINATING ENTITY MUST SIGN THE
NOMINATION FORM.
III. SPONSORING ENTITY (If Applicable). Sponsoring Entities must be willing to commit to the
project's development and implementation.
NAME City of Southlake
CONTACT PERSON Chris Carpenter, AICP
TITLE Senior Park Planner
MAILING ADDRESS 400 N. White Chapel Blvd.
CITY Southlake STATE Texas ZIP CODE 76092
DAYTIME TELEPHONE 817-481-1585 FAX No 817-481-1594
EMAIL carpenter ,ci.southlake.tx.us
Rev. 12/00
IV. PROJECT ELIGIBILITY. The proposed project must have a direct relationship to the surface
transportation system by Function or Impact. Please check only one box.
X FUNCTION IMPACT
V. ELIGIBLE CATEGORIES Check only one category in which the project has a primary
activity.
X 1. Provision of Facilities for Pedestrians and Bicycles
2. Provision of Safety and Education Activities for Pedestrians and Bicycles
3. Acquisition of Scenic Easements and Scenic or Historic Sites
4. Scenic or Historic Highway Program
(including the provision of tourist and welcome center facilities)
5. Landscaping and other Scenic Beautification
6. Historic Preservation
7. Rehabilitation and Operation of Historic Transportation Buildings, Structures or
Facilities (including historic railroad facilities and canals)
8. Preservation of Abandoned Railway Corridors
(including the conversion and use thereof for pedestrian or bicycle trails)
9. Control & Removal of Outdoor Advertising
10. Archaeological Planning & Research
11. Environmental Mitigation of Water Pollution due to Highway Runoff or Reduce
Vehicle -caused Wildlife Mortality while Maintaining Habitat Connectivity
12. Establishment of Transportation Museums
VI. PREVIOUS ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM PROJECTS
Has this project been submitted in previous Transportation Enhancement Program calls?
Yes X No
Is this project a part of another previously selected Transportation Enhancement project?
Yes X No
If yes, please describe.
2
Rev. 12/00
VII. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION
Project Location: Southlake, Texas COUNTY Tarrant
TxDOT District(s): Fort Worth
ProjectLimits: N Carroll Ave. (bridge across S.H.114)
Project length (miles), if applicable: Length of N. Carroll Ave. bridge
Detailed Scope of Work. Provide a clear concise description of the proposed project. Detail all work to be performed,
any right-of-way or easements required, any special land uses planned and the relationship between the proposed
enhancement and the surface transportation system. Include a detail map showing the limits and location of the
project, photographs and site plans.
The City of Southlake is situated in the rapidly growing northeast Tarrant County, just north of
D/FW International Airport, between Dallas and Fort Worth. In the mid 1990s, the city and area
transportation groups led a successful campaign at the Texas Transportation Commission to
reconstruct S.H. 114 in Southlake to a full freeway section. The reconstructed freeway intersects
six major Southlake arterial roads: F.M. 1709, North Kimball Ave., North Carroll Ave., North
White Chapel Blvd., Dove Street, and Kirkwood Blvd. The F.M. 1709 and Kirkwood Blvd.
intersections already exist as freeway interchanges; the freeway will go over N. Kimball, N. White
Chapel, and Dove, and it will go under N. Carroll Ave., where TxDOT plans show an underpass
and bridge over the freeway.
The N. Carroll Ave. bridge was preliminarily designed without a special lane for pedestrian
access. Since the city's 1995 Trail System Master Plan showed an off -road multi -use trail
traversing S.H. 114 at Carroll, the city asked the TxDOT North Tarrant Area Office to incorporate
a separate pedestrian lane on the bridge to accommodate anticipated high use from two Carroll
Ave. schools, a new Town Hall, and the city's major downtown retail district, all with a mile of
each other. The city was told we would need a letter agreement committing to funding the
additional width on the bridge. In 1998, the mayor signed a letter of commitment to TxDOT for an
estimated $150,000 to incorporate the pedestrian lane in the design. In addition, the city has an on-
going S.H. 114 design enhancement program (and bond money committed) to add certain special
features to the freeway. Since some these enhancements are directly related to the pedestrian
facility, namely the ornamental fencing and modification to the C201 rail, the city has included
those costs as STEP requests as well. (Note: The estimates on the following page for these two
items are from a TxDOT cost estimate sheet for the N. Kimball project.)
The pedestrian lane is now designed into the plans. The contractor selected by TxDOT will be
obligated to construct it. The City of Southlake requests funding consideration of the pedestrian
lane and the appurtenant bridge modifications.
VIII. PROJECT TIME LINE. Provide an implementation plan for the proposed project, including a schedule of
project activities.
May 1, 2001 — Southlake City Council resolution approving funding commitment
May 4, 2001 — Project application to NCTCOG
July 2001 — Bid Letting by TxDOT
January 2002 — Utility relocation complete
3
Rev. 12/00
February 2002 — Construction commences
Summer 2004 — Project Complete
IX. PROJECT USE AND BENEFITS. Clearly define who will benefit from the project and how. Describe how
the project will improve social, economic and environmental aspects of the area, region or state. Describe how the
project relates to the surface transportation system and what activities in the project complement the movement of
people and goods.
The majority of Southlake's population resides on the south side of S.H. 114. This roadway is
now being reconstructed to a limited access freeway section. With the freeway construction, there
will also be limited ability of bicyclists and pedestrians to traverse the freeway safely to the north,
where there are several schools, Grapevine Lake access, a large city park, and other destination
points. Also, residents on the north side of the freeway would have limited ability for non -
motorized, safe access to neighbors to the south, the many schools to the south, and the city's
thriving retail districts. Vehicle trips would be reduced, and therefore parking demand and
noxious emissions would be reduced, while providing a healthful alternative form of travel across
what is otherwise a major barrier and impediment for non -motorized travel.
4
Rev. 12/00
X. ITEMIZED BUDGET. List the estimated cost for each work activity. An accurate and itemized budget will
help define the scope of work proposed in the project. Only those approved items of work and cost estimates
established in the nomination form will be eligible for federal funding participation. Contingency costs are not
eligible for participation. Include: Preliminary Engineering, Environmental Costs, Real Property Costs, and
Construction Costs.
CONSTRUCTION FUNDING COSTS
Item/Description
Quantity
Unit Price
Amount
Additional width on N. Carroll Ave. bridge on S.H. 114
5 feet
$30,000.00
$150,000
Ornamental pedestrian fencing
152 M
$625.00
$95,000
Modifications to C201 rail
152 M
$148.00
$22,500
Sub -total
$267,000
XI. FUNDS REQUESTED
Total Itemized Budget (from page 5) 1. $ 267,000
In -Kind Contributions (If applicable):
Real Property $ N/A
Materials $ N/A
Preliminary Engineering (Limited to10% of the project cost) $ (completed by TxDOT)
*Total In -Kind Contributions 2. $ 0.00
Subtotal Value of Project (Line 1 + Line 2 )
TxDOT Administrative Expenses (20% of line 3)
Total Value of Project (Line 3 + Line 4)
Local Match:
20% of Total Value of Projects (Line 5)
Less In -Kind Contributions (Line 2)
Local Match (Line 6 less Line 7)
Federal Funds Requested (80% of Line 5)
*All donations must provide supporting documentation
This space for TxDOT use only
R
3. $ 267,000
4. $ 53,400
5. $ 320,400
6. $ 64,080
7. $ 0.00
8. $ 64,080
9. $ 256,320
Rev. 12/00
Rev. 12/00
XII. COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT. Include documentary evidence of public interest,
endorsement and participation in the development of the proposed project. Provide dates of
public meetings and any letters of support.
1. 1995 Trail System Master Plan
2. 1998 Council Approval Item for Funding Obligation for N. Carroll Pedestrian Lane, City
Council meeting of June 2, 1998.
3. Minutes from above meeting
4. 2001 Trail System Master Plan
5. Southlake City Council Resolution of Funding Support and Minutes of May 1, 2001 meeting.
XIII. PROPERTY ACQUISITION INFORMATION
Will Property be acquired for the project? YES X NO
If yes, provide a written statement from the current property owner stating their willingness to sell, lease or donate
the property, the fair market value, and a description of the property
Who owns the property? TxDOT (pedestrain lane constructed on TxDOT bridge)
Describe how the property is to be acquired (through purchase, lease or donation), including estimated current fair
market value and proposed funding arrangements, if applicable.
N/A
XIV. MAINTENANCE. Identify all parties responsible for operation and maintenance of the projects, the estimated
annual cost to operate and maintain the facility, the source of those funds, and all expected operational income from
the facility and the intended use of that income.
TxDOT standard bridge maintenance.
XV. ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECT IMPACTS. Describe the environmental consequences of the proposed
project and how the proposed project will comply with all applicable local, state and federal environmental laws,
regulations and requirements.
Not applicable. Any environmental impacts were assessed through TxDOT highway construction
documentation process.
7
Rev. 12/00
XVI. PERMITS AND CLEARANCES
Navigational Permits (Section 10)
Yes
No
X
Section 404 Permits (Wetland Regulations)
Yes
No
X
Section 106 Clearance (Archeological and Historical Studies)
Yes
No
X
National Pollution Discharge Elimination System
Yes
No
X
Section 4F (Historical Studies/Parks)
Yes
No
X
Other
Yes
No
XVII. CERTIFICATION OF FUNDING AND SUPPORT
This document should be labeled - CERTIFICATION OF FUNDING AND SUPPORT
(Included and so titled as part of City of Southlake Resolution #00-021)
XVIII. INTENT FOR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PLAN (TIP) PLACEMENT
This document should be labeled - INTENT FOR TIP PLACEMENT
(Included and so titled as part of City of Southlake Resolution #00-021)
XIV. DETERMINATION OF ELIGIBILITY FOR THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF
HISTORIC PLACES (if applicable)
Not applicable.
AN ORIGINAL AND 12 COPIES OF THE COMPLETED
NOMINATION FORM MUST BE SUBMITTED TO A
TXDOT DISTRICT OFFICE BY
5:00 P.M., JUNE 18, 2001
ATTACHMENT A
Project Map, Photographs, and Plans
City of Southlake denoted by red star
:1
Attachment A
Project Maps, Photographs, and Plans
North Carroll Avenue / S.H. 114 Bridge
Vicinity Map
North to City Park/
Additional School/
Lake Grapevine
South to City Park/
Additional School
1000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 Feet N
W E
S
I
Attachment A
Project Maps, Photographs, and Plans
.......... .... T--P---
.. . ......
................... ...................................... I
--- ...... . ......
. . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
....................... J--�J .................. .....
. . . . nu
............ 0� ? IN
...............
--C A
P
... ............ im z
p,6 jig 7:
JIL.,
...................
EDE
---------- P
................... 1?'. ' : _; 1 i . .
........ ... .........
0. 3m
............. i ....
... ........ ... ..
— ---- --- BEE
........... 1. Bm
x SIDEWALK
.......... 4 ---- V:
.. . .......
.......... I
. ....... ..
....... fv ...... ... ...
.....................
.............
..........
P 13.2
----------------
...... .. . . ....... .... .
I.... ....
............ JL in
R"
! - - . ..: ... .... ..
fiM ............
.......... . . ......
.... ............ -P- --- ---- --
:P
. ..............
L cc
................
-1450�m DI'A. S.
......... .. .
i -oil
L... ...............
... ... ... ..
i Piz �'n
0 n M ti i
LAX .......
Ln
3>
0 m ~O ......
t
-- -----
0 z rn
'1 0 C
rn
C C)
-C M --i ........ .
C:
> z ......
2Z
Lo LA
Lo Ln
W
i Ld Z
FACE OF (FW)
.... ......
o
C201 (M) RAIL
.
Ole
......... . ......
Attachment A
t Project Maps, Photographs, and Plans
pq
n
40
__
LA
=�'
T
2^
O
cn fn po `
' m
fs
00
TT
OY O
=
I FENCE
s SPA o ,0 .,
I�
n
T
0
—mil oc4 w�c1J_f
co
N
Iz
x i 01
o
n�
90 o f n Di
0 D I
� NA
��
R • V V.
C)
-
c ^
^5
L m a Fm
�. c1
c•
r
c•
Tau 'C0
�mCl mm y�k
vim
9fm
ON.
9N 9�n
f
1'
I
i lEr cNN ABOVE BASE Or RNL n
Attachment B
IR
0
Documentation of Community Support
MEMORANDUM
May 29, 1998
TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager
FROM: Chris Carpenter, Senior Comprehensive Planner
SUBJECT: Authorize the Mayor to submit a letter to TxDOT committing to cover the
additional construction costs on Carroll Avenue bridge overpass at S.H. 114
in order to accommodate the recommendations of the Trail System Master
Plan
As you know, in order to implement the planned combination of on -road and off -road bike trails for the
new sections of S.H. 114 as detailed in the Trail System -Master Plan, staff has been in contact with
TxDOT to establish the design criteria necessary to accomplish this (as well as the associated costs). The
following are pertinent issues related to these discussions concerning the design for the Carroll Avenue
overpass:
1. TxDOT will agree to provide a 10-foot, two-way bike trail on one side of the road (east side),
designed to meet AASHTO standards. (See enclosed preliminary bridge section and typical bike
railing)
2. This trail increases the width of the planned overpass by approximately 5 feet, adding to the cost of
construction above standard costs in the range of approximately $150,000. This figure has been
expressed to be the highest possible estimate, and could be lower when detailed plans are drafted.
3. In order to maintain the proper schedule for this overpass construction, Sherry Williams of TxDOT
has indicated that she will need a commitment from the City within a week or so as to whether or not
the trail needs to be included on the bridge. After that, alterations to the plans run the risk of delaying
the final bridge design and, therefore, delaying construction.
4. Staff has also received a commitment from TxDOT that the city's share of funding for the overpass
will not be due until after October of 1999, placing this funding item as a FY 1999-2000 expenditure.
5. Staff has been in contact with various representatives from NCTCOG staff concerning possible
Federal reimbursement programs. As of this date, President Clinton has yet to sign the transportation
funding bill (TEA-21) replacing ISTEA (which expired May 1, 1998), leaving many of the funding
mechanisms in limbo until then. After passage, expected this summer, staff would like to pursue a
meeting with Michael Morris, NCTCOG director of transportation, to solicit his feedback directly _
concerning possible new funding sources.
Please place this item on the next Council agenda for consideration and authorization. Feel free to
contact me at extension 866 should you have any questions.
enc: Preliminary Carroll bridge cross-section
TxDOT typical bike railing
CLC
L:\ComDev\WF-FILESTROJECTS\CORRI DO R\TXDOT\Dir_M tg. DOC 5T7_
Attachment B
Documentation of Community Support
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
667 NORTH CARROLL AVENUE, SOUTHLAKE
JUNE 2, 1998
MINUTES
COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Rick Stacy; Mayor Pro Tem W. Ralph
Evans; Deputy Mayor Pro Tem Scott Martin. Members: Gary Fawks, Debra
Edmondson, and Ronnie Kendall.
COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT: Wayne Moffat.
STAFF PRESENT: Curtis Hawk, City Manager; Shawa Yelverton, Assistant City
Manager; Darcey Imm, Assistant to the City Manager; Lou Ann Heath, Director of
Finance; Greg Last, Director of Community Development; Karen Gandy, Zoning
Administrator; Bob Whitehead, Director of Public Works; Ron Harper, City Engineer;
Shawn Poe, Capital Projects Coordinator; Charlie Thompson, Deputy Director of Public
Works; Chris Carpenter, Comprehensive Planner; Lauren Safranek, Director of Human
Resources; Chuck Ewings, Assistant to the Public Works Director; Billy Campbell,
Director of Public Safety; E. Allen Taylor, Jr., City Attorney; and, Sandra L. LeGrand,
City Secretary.
WORK SESSION: The work session began at 5:00 p.m., whereby items on the agenda
were discussed by the City Council and staff. The work session ended at 6: 15 p.m.
Items discussed during the work session included:
✓ Fred Low, Attorney and Civil Engineer for Explorer Pipeline, Tulsa, Oklahoma,
spoke regarding agenda item #7-A (ZA 98-027).
✓ Art Clayton, agenda item #8-B (ZA 98-040).
✓ David McMahan, 1335 Hidden Glen, Southlake, agenda item #7-I, (ZA 98-037).
✓ John MacFarlane, agenda item #8-A, (ZA 98-036).
REGULAR SESSION:
Agenda Item #1, Call To Order
Mayor Rick Stacy called the Regular City Council meeting to order at 6:15 p.m. The
Mayor welcomed those in attendance for the meeting.
INVOCATION: Mayor Pro Tem W. Ralph Evans.
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JUNE 2, 1998 PAGE 1
Attachment B
Documentation of Community Support
noted the school board did grant the easement. He also commented that the City Council
and school board meet annually to discuss items of mutual interest. They would like to
meet with the new council and suggested a joint meeting be held on June 19, 1998 from
2:00 to 5:00 p.m. Councilmembers agreed for a meeting at that time.
Councilmember Debra Edmondson suggested the meeting be video taped for viewers
who are not able to attend a meeting during the day. Mr. Hawk stated we plan on video
taping the meeting for viewing on Channel 25.
Agenda Item #4-C, SPIN Report
Al Morin, SPIN #10 Representative, addressed the Council with the issues relating to his
area. He noted the sewer is in and going well. He stated "SPIN" is going to hold a
"Planning and Zoning College" for citizens to better understand the zoning process. He
also stated that on June 22, 1998 there will be a city-wide SPIN meeting where the Town
Center will be the topic for discussion. The public is invited to attend.
Agenda Item #5, Consent Agenda
Mayor Stacy asked the audience if anyone wanted to comment on consent agenda items,
and there were no comments. He then read the consent agenda items into the record:
5-A. Permission to advertise for bids for slurry -seal of streets located in Dove Estates,
Harbor Oaks, Emerald Estates, Whispering Dell Estates, Highland Estates, Cedar
7Oaks Estates, Brittany Court, and Raven Bend subdivisions.
-B.Authorize the Mayor to submit a letter to TxDot committing to cover the
additional construction costs on the Carroll Avenue bridge overpass at SH 114 in
order to accommodate the recommendations of the Trail System Master Plan.
5-C. kuthorize the Mayor to enter into a professional services agreement with Lee
Engineering for the design of FM 1709 signal timings and capacity
improvements.
5-D. Authorize the Mayor to execute an interlocal agreement for radio service
maintenance between the City of Southlake and the City of North Richland Hills.
5-E. Item left intentionally blank.
5-F. Resolution No. 98-50, In support of the City of Grapevine's request to Texas
Department of Transportation for assistance in improving the interchange at Bass
Pro Drive and S.H. 121.
5-G. Award of bid to James Enterprise for janitorial services.
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JUNE 2, 1998 PAGE 4
Attachment B
Documentation of Community Support
5-H. Resolution No. 98-47, In support of making application for Federal Emergency
Management Grant funding.
5-I. Change Order No. 3 to the contract with Saber Development Corporation for the
installation of sanitary sewer in Huntwick Estates Addition.
54. Change Order No. 4 to the contract with Mid -State Utilities for the installation of
sanitary sewer in Mission Hills Addition.
Motion was made to approve the consent agenda as presented, including items #5-A, #5-
B, #5-C, #5-D, #5-E, #5-F, #5-G, #5-H, 45-I, and, #54.
Motion: Martin
Second: Evans
Ayes: Martin, Evans, Fawks, Edmondson, Kendall, Stacy
Nays; None
Approved: 6-0 vote
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING CONSENT ITEMS
5-A. Permission to advertise for bids for slurry -seal of streets in Dove Estates, Harbor
Oaks, Emerald Estates, Whispering Dell Estates, Highland Estates, Cedar Oaks
Estates, Brittany Court, and Raven Bend Addition. Selected streets are annually
scheduled to receive slurry -seal treatment. This is a preventive maintenance
measure to streets that are older, yet still in good condition. The slurry -seal will
provide additional protection and help to extend the life of the pavement. Last
year a seal -coat process called "micro surfacing" was applied to streets in Cross
Timber Hills, Woodland Heights, and Lake Wood Additions. For this year's
program, staff is recommending the seal -coat process called slurry -seal. Slurry -
seal is less expensive and designed for local street application. The estimated cost
of this project is $77,000. Funds are available from the recently approved bond
sale.
5-B. Authorize the Mayor to submit a letter to TxDOT committing to cover the
additional construction costs on Carroll Avenue bridge overpass at S.H. 114 in
order to accommodate the recommendations of the Trail System Master Plan. In
order to implement the planned combination of on -road and off -road bike trails
for the new sections of SH 114 as detailed in the Trail System Master Plan, staff
has been in contact with TxDOT to establish the design criteria necessary to
accomplish this. The memorandum from Chris Carpenter, Senior Comprehensive
Planner, dated May 29, 1998, is hereby attached to the minutes of this meeting.
5-C. Professional services agreement with Lee Engineering for the design of F.M.
1709 signal timings and capacity improvements. The technical memorandum for
F.M. 1709 Signal System Evaluation, as prepared by Lee Engineering, was the
basis for the May 7, 1998, Fort Worth District TxDOT meeting. TxDOT
expressed a commitment to work with the city for making improvements along
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JUNE 2, 1998 PAGE 5
Attachment B
Documentation of Community Support
Im
they can be ranked and discussed by the Council at the June Retreat. A copy of the
information presented is hereby attached to the minutes of this meeting.
Agenda Item #12, Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned by Mayor Rick Stacy at 12:50 a.m.
Mayo Rick Stacy
ATTEST:'••.��
Sandra L. LeGrand
City Secretary
M:\WP-FILES\MINUTES\Min-cc-6-2-98.doe
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JUNE 2, 1998 PAGE 22
RESOLUTION NO. 01-021
CERTIFICATION OF FUNDING SUPPORT
And
INTENT FOR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PLAN (TIP)
PLACEMENT
A RESOLUTION BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS APPROVING THE SUBMITTAL OF AN
APPLICATION TO THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION STATEWIDE TRANSPORTATION
ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM (S.T.E.P.) FOR A PROJECT
NOMINATION PROVIDED BY THE TRANSPORTATION
EQUITY ACT FOR THE 21IT CENTURY;
AND,
RECOGNIZING THAT THE METROPOLITAN PLANNING
ORGANIZATION (MPO) POLICY COMMITTEE IS CERTIFYING
INTENT FOR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PLAN (TIP)
PLACEMENT FOR PROJECTS FUNDED BY THE FISCAL YEAR
2001 STATEWIDE TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENT
PROGRAM.
WHEREAS, the City Council of Southlake, Texas desires to submit an
application for the development of: (1) FM 1709 Path Improvements (Bid Package No.
2A, FM 1709 from Pearson to SH 114, excluding Package No. 2B and N. Kimball to SH
114; and (2) North Carroll/SH 114 Pedestrian Lane and Additional Bridge Width); and
WHEREAS, the above -mentioned projects will have regional significance for
users; and
WHEREAS, the city desires to establish its commitment to pledge the 20%
match in accordance with the Texas Transportation Enhancement Program guidelines;
and
Attachments C and D
C — Resolution for Funding Support
D — Intent for TIP Placement
Resolution No. 01-021
May 1, 2001
Page 2
WHEREAS, the Transportation Efficiency Act for the 215t Century provides for a
transportation enhancement program and the Texas Department of Transportation has
issued a program call for this program; and
WHEREAS, federal guidelines require that projects selected for federal funding
under the transportation enhancement program must be placed in the Transportation
Improvement Program (TIP) of the Metropolitan Planing Organization; and
WHEREAS, Southlake, Texas has applied for funding through the Statewide
Transportation Enhancement Program and the city commits to the projects' development,
implementation, construction, maintenance and financing:
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
0 THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS:
SECTION 1
That the above mentioned projects selected for statewide enhancement program
funding by the Texas Transportation Commission will be placed in the appropriate
Transportation Improvement Program for Southlake Metropolitan Planning Organization
SECTION 2
This resolution shall become effective on the date of approval by the City
Council.
Resolution No. 01-021
May 1, 2001
Page 3
PASSED AND APPROVED THIS DAY OF , 2001.
CITY OF SOUTHLAKE
Rick Stacy, Mayor
ATTEST:
Sandra L. LeGrand
City Secretary
NA\Parks & Recreation\Resolutions\01-021-STEP Funding App.doc
t
City of Southiake, Texas
MEMORANDUM
April 19, 2001
To: Billy Campbell, City Manager
From: Pedram Farahnak, P.E., Director of Public Works
Subject: Award an Emergency Contract to Reynolds Asphalt and Construction
Company for re -construction of Sam School Road from Dove Street to
Southlake's north City limit due to closure of Kirkwood Boulevard exit.
Action Requested: Award an Emergency Contract to Reynolds Asphalt and Construction
Company for re -construction of Sam School Road from Dove Street to
Southlake's north City limit due to closure of Kirkwood Boulevard exit.
Background
Information:
Financial
Consideration:
Due to the necessity of repairs to the Kirkwood East bound ramp at
SH114, TxDOT has determined to close this exit within the next 30-60
days. Because of this closure, it is anticipated that Sam School Road will
experience a substantial increase in traffic load.
As you are aware, Sam School road is in need of major rehabilitation due
to extensive road base and surface failure. Because of the substantial
traffic load increase, the engineering staff anticipates rapid failure of the
roadway, which may pose serious safety compromise to the traveling
traffic.
We have contacted Reynolds Asphalt and Construction Company and
received a proposal to reconstruct the roadway at the earliest time possible.
The proposed improvements will widen the current road from a 20 feet
width to 22 feet. The current base and surface coarse will be pulverized to
construct two (2), four (4) feet shoulders on each side. Other
improvements will include a six (6) inch compacted limestone base
overlaid by three (3) inches of asphaltic surface. In addition drainage
ditches will be shaped and stabilized for positive flow.
The roadway improvements as described will require a total expenditure of
$133,455.00. The City of Westlake has assumed $38,701.95 of this
amount. Funds are available from the balance remaining in the 1999-2000
CIP Budget (traffic mitigation / calming projects). Staff also recommends
r
an additional 10% allowance ($9,500) for unanticipated items related to
construction phase.
Citizen Input/
Board Review: Not applicable.
Legal Review: Not Applicable.
Alternatives: Consider award or reject.
Project
Schedule: 45 days from the notice to proceed date.
Supporting
Documents: Project location map
Roadway cross section design
Staff
Recommendation: Please place on the City Council Agenda for May 1, 2001. It is
recommended that the award be made to Reynolds Asphalt and
Construction Company in the amount of $94,753.05 and an additional
10% ($9,500) be allowed for unanticipated items related to construction
phase.
Staff
Contact: Billy Campbell, City Manager, Ext. 1409
Pedram Farahnak, P.E., Director of Public Works, Ext. 2308
Charlie Thomas, P.E., City Engineer, Ext. 2175
Mike Patterson, Operations Manager, Ext. 2101
CC: Valerie Bradley, Assistant to the Director
Ricky Black, Director of Public Safety
Marlin Price, Chief of Police
Greg Last, Director of Economic Development
PF/ta
Z
V,
y
U)
W
cr
Q
F-
Q
H
3
a
r
0
cU w
a
w
w Q)
LD Z z z
H O Q H
F-F-a
m a cc
"U)wQ
a
w = a w
U Q >
LLJ
H
Q H = F-
Q
a: O co
`D z n
U)
ca
x
H
W
c
U
LL
JC
Q
c
� U
m w
D:
QC
� N
,
m cv o
o�
aC
w m
'—
C
o
o
C
m F----
z
= o z
U Cl- O
J :D H
D F-
z U) W
O W J
M = d
Q U M:
> F- O
2 H U
O
O
C
w
N Q
H LI J
� F-
W U
> Q
J a
Z x
a o
U
F-
Z co
W
2: Q >--
W W F-
> Q H
Q Q U)
d Q Z
CO W
0 Q
Z
H Q �
I--- Q l!7
F�-i Q
X d O
W U) F-
N
v
W cU
U)
a
m w
F-
X H
W
J F-
LL O
Q
X
CD F-
O O
Z Q
H O
Qz
CZ O J
H O
O F- O
W U =
CI) W U
O Cn C1)
a
O
Er Q
Cf)
City of Southlake, Texas
To:
From:
MEMORANDUM
May 1, 2001
Billy Campbell, City Manager
Mike Hutchison, Senior Civil Engineer, ext. 2361
Subject: Approve the Engineering Services Agreement with Cheatham and Associates
for the design of State Highway 114 utility relocations, Neighborhood Sewer
projects, Water system projects, and Water System Master Plan Report.
Action Requested: Approve the Engineering Services agreement with Cheatham and
associates for the design of SH 114 utility relocations, Neighborhood
Sewer projects, Water system projects, and Water System Master Plan
Report.
Background
Information: The Council approved various water and sewer projects in the FY
2000/2001 CIP. Staff has compiled the remainder of the water and sewer
projects approved this year, most of which are small in scope when
considered individually. The projects include neighborhood sewer
installation, water line replacements, and upgrades, and the relocation of
water and sewer lines in conjunction with the widening of State Highway
114. In addition, staff recommends that Cheatham and Associates provide
a Water System Study report, which is an update and compilation of data
collected under previous design contracts in connection with providing a
concept plan and water tower designs. This document would be used in a
way similar to that of the city's other master plans in an effort to
adequately plan for future CIP and development projects.
Financial
Consideration: Compensation for these services totals $671,410 is funded from each of
the project line items in the FY 2000/2001 CIP.
Citizen Input/
Board Review: None.
Legal Review: None.
Alternatives: The council may approve or reject this agreement.
Supporting
Documents: Engineering services agreement
(W Project Reference Legend
Project Reference Map
Staff
Recommendation: Please place on the City Council Agenda for Ma
y
Staff Contact: Mike Hutchison, E.I.T., Ext. 2361
Pedram Farahnak, P.E., Director of Public Works, Ext. 2308
STANDARD FORM OF AGREEMENT
BETWEEN
OWNER AND ENGINEER
FOR
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
THIS IS AN AGREEMENT made as of , 2001 between the CITY OF
SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS, a municipal corporation and home rule City with its main offices located at 1400 Main Street,
Southlake, Texas (OWNER) and CHEATHAM AND ASSOCIATES (ENGINEER). OWNER intends to acquire all
professional engineering services required for the project known as, 2000/2001 CIP Water and Sewer Improvements
design, and Water Study Report, the aforesaid services are otherwise described in that Scope of Work and fees attached
hereto as, Attachments "A" thru "F" and for all purposes incorporated herein (hereinafter called the Project).
OWNER and ENGINEER in consideration of their mutual covenants herein agree in respect of the performance of
professional engineering services by ENGINEER and the payment for those services by OWNER as set forth below.
SECTION I —BASIC SERVICES OF ENGINEER
I.I. General.
I.I.I. ENGINEER shall provide for OWNER
professional engineering services in all phases of the
Project to which this Agreement applies as hereinafter
provided. These services will include serving as
OWNER's professional engineering representative for the
project, providing professional engineering consultation
and advice and furnishing customary civil services
incidental thereto.
1.2. Study and Report Phase.
After written authorization to proceed, ENGINEER shall
1.2.1. Consult with OWNER to clarify and define
OWNER's requirements for the Project and review
available data.
1.2.2. Advise OWNER as to the necessity of OWNER's
providing or obtaining from others data or services of the
types described in paragraph 3.4., and assist OWNER in
obtaining such data and services.
1.2.3. Identify and analyze requirements of governmental
authorities having jurisdiction to approve the design of the
Project and participate in consultations with such
authorities.
1.2.4. Provide analysis of OWNER's needs, planning
surveys, site evaluations and comparative studies of
prospective sites and solutions.
1.2.5. Provide a general economic analysis of OWNER's
requirements applicable to various alternatives.
1.2.6. Prepare a Report containing schematic layouts,
sketches and conceptual design criteria with appropriate
exhibits to indicate clearly the considerations involved
(including applicable requirements of governmental
authorities having jurisdiction as aforesaid) and the
alternative solutions avail�ble to OWNER and setting
forth ENGINEER's findings and recommendations. This
Report will be accompanied by ENGINEER's opinion of
probable costs for the Project, including the following
which will be separately itemized: Construction Cost,
allowance for engineering costs and contingencies, and
(on the basis of information furnished by OWNER)
allowances for such other items as charges of all other
professionals and consultants, for the cost of land and
rights -of -way, for compensation for or damages to
properties, for interest and financing charges and for other
services to be provided by others for Owner pursuant to
paragraphs 3.7 through 3.11, inclusive. The total of all
such costs, allowances, etc. are hereinafter called "Total
Project Costs".
1.2.7. Furnish multiple copies of the Study and Report
documents (not to exceed five (5) copies) and review
them in person with OWNER.
1.3. Preliminary Design Phase.
After written authorization to proceed with the
Preliminary Design Phase, ENGINEER shall:
1.3.1. In consultation with OWNER and on the basis of
the accepted Study and Report documents, determine the
general scope, extent and character of the Project.
1.3.2. Prepare Preliminary Design documents consisting
of final design criteria, preliminary drawings, outline
specifications and written descriptions of the Project.
1.3.3. Advise OWNER if additional data or services of the
types described in paragraph 3.4 are necessary and assist
OWNER in obtaining such data and services.
1.3.4. Based on the information contained in the
preliminary design documents, submit a revised opinion
of probable Total Project Costs.
1.3.5. Furnish multiple copies of the above Preliminary
Design documents and present and review them in person
with OWNER, not to exceed five (5) copies.
1.3.6. Derive right-of-way (ROW) data and easement
documents as needed for the OWNER to begin land
acquisition.
1.4. Final Design Phase.
After written authorization to proceed with the Final
Design Phase, ENGINEER shall:
1.4.1. On the basis of the accepted Preliminary Design
documents and the revised opinion of probable Total
Project Costs prepare for incorporation in the Contract
Documents final drawings to show the general scope,
extent and character of the work to be furnished and
performed by Contractor(s) (hereinafter called
"Drawings") and Specifications.
1.4.2. Provide technical criteria, written descriptions and
design data for OWNER's use in filing applications for
permits with or obtaining approvals of such governmental
authorities as have jurisdiction to approve the design of
the Project, and assist OWNER in consultations with
appropriate authorities.
1.4.3. Advise OWNER of any adjustments to the latest
opinion of probable Total Project Costs caused by
changes in general scope, extent or character or design
requirements of the Project or Construction Costs.
Furnish to OWNER a revised opinion of probable Total
Project Costs based on the Drawings and Specifications.
1.4.4. Prepare for review and approval by OWNER, its
legal counsel and other advisors contract agreement
forms, general conditions and supplementary conditions,
and (where appropriate) bid forms, invitations to bid and
instructions to bidders.
1.4.5. Furnish multiple copies of the above documents
and of the Drawings and Specifications and present and
review them in person with OWNER, not to exceed five
(5) copies.
1.5. Bidding or Negotiating Phase.
After written authorization to proceed with the Bidding or
Negotiating Phase, ENGINEER shall:
1.5.1. Assist OWNER in advertising for and obtaining
bids or negotiating proposals for each separate prime
contract for construction, materials, equipment and
services; and, where applicable, maintain a record of
prospective bidders to whom Bidding Documents have
been issued, attend pre -bid conferences and receive and
process deposits for Bidding Documents.
1.5.2. Assist OWNER in issuing addenda as appropriate
to interpret, clarify or expand the Bidding Documents.
1.5.3. Consult with and advise OWNER as to the
acceptability of subcontractors, suppliers and other
persons and organizations proposed by the prime
contractor(s) (herein called "Contractor(s)") for those
portions of the work as to which such acceptability is
required by the Bidding Documents.
1.5.4. Consult with OWNER concerning and determine
the acceptability of substitute materials and equipment
proposed by Contractor(s) when substitution prior to the
award of contracts is allowed by the Bidding Documents.
1.5.5. Attend the bid opening, prepare bid tabulation
sheets and assist OWNER in evaluating bids or proposals
and in assembling and awarding contracts for
construction, materials, equipment and services.
1.6. Construction Phase.
During the Construction Phase:
1.6.1. Visits to Site and Observation of Construction. In
connection with observations of the work of Contractor(s)
while it is in progress:
1.6.1.1. ENGINEER shall make visits to the site at
intervals appropriate to the various stages of
construction as necessary in order to observe as an
experienced and qualified design professional the
progress and quality of the various aspects of
Contractor(s)' work. Based on information obtained
during such visits and on such observations,
Page 2 of 11 Pages
ENGINEER shall endeavor to determine in general if
such work is proceeding in accordance with the
Contract Documents and ENGINEER shall keep
OWNER informed of the progress of the work.
1.6.1.2. The purpose of ENGINEER's visits to the site
will be to enable ENGINEER to better carry out the
duties and responsibilities assigned to and undertaken
by ENGINEER during the Construction Phase, and in
addition, by exercise of ENGINEER's efforts as an
experienced and qualified design professional, to
provide for OWNER a greater degree of confidence
that the completed work of Contractor(s) will conform
generally to the Contract Documents and that the
integrity of the design concept as reflected in the
Contract Documents has been implemented and
preserved by Contractor(s). On the other hand,
ENGINEER shall not, during such visits or as a result
of such observations of Contractor(s)' work in
progress, supervise, direct or have control over
Contractor(s)' work nor shall ENGINEER have
authority over or responsibility for the means,
methods, techniques, sequences or procedures of
constructions elected by Contractor(s), for safety
precautions and programs incident to the work of
Contractor(s) or for any failure of Contractor(s) to
comply with laws, rules, regulations, ordinances, codes
or orders applicable to Contractor(s) furnishing and
performing their work. Accordingly, ENGINEER can
neither guarantee the performance of the construction
contracts by Contractor(s) nor assume responsibility
for Contractor(s)' failure to furnish and perform their
work in accordance with the Contract Documents.
1.6.2. Interpretations and Clarifications. ENGINEER
shall issue necessary interpretations and clarifications of
the Contract Documents as requested by the Owner.
1.6.3. Shop Drawings. ENGINEER shall review and
approve (or take other appropriate action in respect of)
Shop Drawings, samples and other data which
Contractor(s) are required to submit, but only for
conformance with the design concept of the Project and
compliance with the information given in the Contract
Documents. Such reviews and approvals or other action
shall not extend to means, methods, techniques, sequences
or procedures of construction or to safety precautions and
programs incident thereto.
1.6.4. Substitutes. ENGINEER shall evaluate the
acceptability of substitute materials and equipment
proposed by Contractor(s) and make recommendations to
OWNER, subject to the provisions of paragraph 2.2.2.
1.6.5. Disputes between OWNER and Contractor.
ENGINEER shall act as initial interpreter of the
requirements of the Contract Documents and judge of the
acceptability of the work performed thereunder.
ENGINEER shall also make recommendations to
OWNER on all claims of Contractor(s) relating to the
acceptability of the work or the interpretation of the
requirements of the Contract Documents pertaining to the
execution and progress of the work. OWNER has the
final decision with regard to such disputes.
1.6.6. Limitation of Responsibilities. ENGINEER shall
not be responsible to OWNER for the acts or omissions of
any Contractor, or of any subcontractor or supplier, or any
of the Contractor(s)' or subcontractor's or supplier's agents
or employees or any other persons (except ENGINEER's
own employees and agents) whether at the site or
otherwise furnishing or performing any of the
Contractor(s)' work; however, nothing contained in
paragraphs 1.6.1. through 1.6.6 inclusive, shall be
construed to release ENGINEER from liability for failure
to properly perform duties and responsibilities assumed
by ENGINEER in the Contract Documents.
1.7. Operational Phase.
During the Operational Phase, ENGINEER shall, when
requested by OWNER:
1.7.1. Prepare a set of reproducible record prints of
Drawings showing those changes made during the
construction process, based on the marked -up prints,
drawings and other data furnished by Contractor(s) to
ENGINEER.
1.7.2. In company with OWNER, visit the Project to
observe any apparent defects in the completed
construction, assist OWNER in consultations and
discussions with Contractor(s) concerning correction of
such deficiencies, and make recommendations as to
replacement or correction of defective work.
SECTION 2—ADDITIONAL SERVICES OF
ENGINEER
2.1. Services Requiring Authorization in Advance.
If authorized in writing by OWNER, ENGINEER shall
furnish or obtain from others Additional Services of the
types listed in paragraphs 2.1.1. through 2.1.14. inclusive.
Page 3 of 11 Pages
These services are not included as part of Basic Services
except to the extent provided otherwise in this
Agreement; these will be paid for by OWNER as
indicated in Section 5.
2.1.1. Preparation of applications and supporting
documents (in addition to those furnished under Basic
Services) for private or governmental grants, loans or
advances in connection with the Project; preparation or
review of environmental assessments and impact
statements; review and evaluation of the effect on the
design requirements of the Project of any such statements
and documents prepared by others; and assistance in
obtaining approvals of authorities having jurisdiction over
the anticipated environmental impact of the project.
2.1.2. Services to make measured drawings of or to
investigate existing conditions or facilities, or to verify
the accuracy of drawings or other information furnished
by OWNER.
2.1.3. Services resulting from significant changes in the
general scope, extent or character of the Project or its
design including, but not limited to changes in size,
complexity, OWNER's schedule, character of
construction or method of financing; and revising
previously accepted studies, reports, design documents or
Contract Documents when such revisions are required by
changes in laws, rules, regulations, ordinances, codes or
orders enacted subsequent to the preparation of such
studies, reports or documents, or are due to any other
cause beyond ENGINEER's control.
2.1.4. Providing renderings or models for OWNER's use.
2.1.5. Preparing documents for alternate bids requested by
OWNER for Contractor(s)' work which is not executed or
documents for out -of -sequence work.
2.1.6. Investigations and studies involving, but not limited
to, detailed consideration of operations, maintenance and
overhead expenses; providing value engineering during
the course of design; the preparation of feasibility studies,
cash flow and economic evaluations, rate schedules and
appraisals; assistance in obtaining financing for the
Project; evaluating processes available for licensing and
assisting OWNER in obtaining process licensing; detailed
quantity surveys of material, equipment and labor; and
audits or inventories required in connection with
construction performed by OWNER.
2.1.7. Furnishing services of independent professional
associates and consultants for other than Basic Services
(which include, but are not limited to, customary civil,
structural, mechanical, and electrical engineering and
customary architectural design incidental thereto); and
providing data or services of the types described in
paragraph 3.4 when OWNER employs ENGINEER to
provide such data or services in lieu of furnishing the
same in accordance with paragraph 3.4.
2.1.8. If ENGINEER's compensation is on the basis of a
lump sum, percentage of Construction Cost, or cost-plus a
fixed fee method of payment, services resulting from the
award of more separate prime contracts for construction,
materials or equipment for the Project than are
contemplated by paragraph 5.1.1. If ENGINEER's
compensation is on the basis of a percentage of
Construction Cost and ENGINEER has been required to
prepare Contract Documents on the assumption that more
than one prime contract will be awarded for construction,
materials and equipment, but only one prime contract is
awarded for construction, materials and equipment for the
Project, services attributable to the preparation of contract
documentation that was rendered unusable and any
revisions or additions to contract documentation used that
was necessitated by the award of only one prime contract.
2.1.9. Services during out-of-town travel required of
ENGINEER other than visits to the site or OWNER's
office as required by Section 1.
2.1.10. Assistance in connection with bid protest,
rebidding, or renegotiating contracts for construction,
materials, equipment or services when ENGINEER did
not create or contribute to the event or situation requiring
said assistance, rebidding, renegotiating, materials,
equipment, or services.
2.1.11. Providing any type of property surveys or related
engineering services needed for the transfer of interests in
real property and field surveys for design purposes and
engineering surveys and staking to enable Contractor(s) to
proceed with their work; and providing other special field
surveys.
2.1.12. Preparation of operating, maintenance and staffing
manuals to supplement Basic Services under paragraph
1.7.
2.1.13. Preparing to serve or serving as a consultant or
witness for OWNER in any litigation, arbitration or other
legal or administrative proceeding involving the Project
unless ENGINEER created or contributed to the cause of
the litigation.
2.1.14. Additional services in connection with the Project,
including services which are to be furnished by OWNER
Page 4 of 11 Pages
in accordance with Section 3, and services not otherwise
provided for in this Agreement.
2.2. Required Additional Services.
When required by the Contract Documents in
circumstances beyond ENGINEER's control, ENGINEER
shall furnish or obtain from others, as circumstances
require during construction and with specific
authorization from OWNER, Additional Services of the
types listed in paragraphs 2.2.1 through 2.2.6, inclusive.
These services are not included as part of Basic Services.
ENGINEER shall advise OWNER promptly before
starting any of the following additional services which
will be paid for by OWNER as indicated in Section 5.
2.2.1. Services in connection with work directive changes
and change orders to reflect changes requested by
OWNER if the resulting change in compensation for
Basic Services is not commensurate with the additional
services rendered.
2.2.2. Services in making revisions to Drawings and
Specifications occasioned by the acceptance of
substitutions proposed by Contractor(s); and services after
the award of each contract in evaluating and determining
the acceptability of an unreasonable or excessive number
of substitutions proposed by Contractor.
2.2.3. Services resulting from significant delays, changes
or price increases occurring as a direct or indirect result of
material, equipment or energy shortages.
2.2.4. Additional or extended services during construction
made necessary by (1) work damaged by fire or other
cause during construction, (2) a significant amount of
defective or neglected work of any Contractor, (3)
acceleration of the progress schedule involving services
beyond normal working hours, or (4) default by any
Contractor.
2.2.5. Services (other than Basic Services during the
Operations Phase) in connection with any partial
utilization of any part of the Project by OWNER prior to
Substantial Completion.
2.2.6. Evaluating an unreasonable or extensive number of
claims submitted by Contractor(s) or others in connection
with the work.
SECTION 3—OWNER'S RESPONSIBILITIES
OWNER shall do the following in a timely manner so as
not to delay the services of ENGINEER:
3.1. Designate in writing a person to act as OWNER's
representative with respect to the services to be rendered
under this Agreement. Such person shall have complete
authority to transmit instructions, receive information,
interpret and define OWNER's policies and decisions with
respect to ENGINEER's services for the Project.
3.2. Provide all criteria and full information as to
OWNER's requirements for the Project, including design
objectives and constraints, space, capacity and
performance requirements, flexibility and expandability,
and any budgetary limitations; and furnish copies of all
design and construction standards which OWNER will
require to be included in the Drawings and Specifications.
3.3. Assist ENGINEER by placing at ENGINEER's
disposal all available information pertinent to the Project
including previous reports and any other data relative to
design or construction of the Project.
3.4. Furnish to ENGINEER, as required for performance
of ENGINEER's Basic Services (except to the extent
provided otherwise in this Agreement) the following:
3.4.1. data prepared by or resulting from the services
of others, including without limitation borings,
probings and subsurface explorations, hydrographic
surveys, laboratory tests and inspections of samples,
materials and equipment;
3.4.2. appropriate professional interpretations of all of
the foregoing;
3.4.3. environmental assessment and impact
statements;
3.4.4. property, boundary, easement, right-of-way,
topographic and utility surveys, to the extent required
by ENGINEER, and only if not required to be
performed by ENGINEER as set out in ENGINEER's
Proposal;
3.4.5. property descriptions;
3.4.6. zoning, deed and other land use restrictions;
all of which ENGINEER may use and rely upon in
performing services under this Agreement.
Page 5 of 11 Pages
3.5. Provide engineering surveys to establish reference
points for construction (unless required to be performed
by Engineer as Basic Services under ENGINEER's
Proposal) to enable Contractor(s) to proceed with the
layout of the work.
3.6. Arrange for access to and make all provisions for
ENGINEER to enter upon public and private property as
required for ENGINEER to perform services under this
Agreement.
3.7. Examine all studies, reports, sketches, Drawings,
Specifications, proposals and other documents presented
by ENGINEER, obtain advice of an attorney, insurance
counselor and other consultants as OWNER deems
appropriate for such examination and render in writing
decisions pertaining thereto within a reasonable time so as
not to delay the services of ENGINEER.
3.8. Furnish approvals and permits from all governmental
authorities having jurisdiction over the Project and such
approvals and consents from others as may be necessary
for completion of the Project, unless required to be
performed by ENGINEER as Basic Services under this
Agreement.
3.9. Provide such accounting, independent cost estimating
and insurance counseling services as may, in the
judgement of the OWNER, be required for the Project,
such legal services as OWNER may require or
ENGINEER may reasonably request with regard to legal
issues pertaining to the Project including any that may be
raised by Contractor(s), such auditing service as OWNER
may require to ascertain how or for what purpose any
Contractor has used the moneys paid under the
construction contract, and such inspection services as
OWNER may require to ascertain that Contractor(s) are
complying with any law, rule, regulation, ordinance, code
or order applicable to their furnishing and performing the
work.
3.10 If OWNER designates a person to represent
OWNER at the site who is not ENGINEER or
ENGINEER's agent or employee, the duties,
responsibilities and limitations of authority of such other
person and the affect thereof on the duties and
responsibilities of ENGINEER and the Resident Project
Representative (and any assistants) will be set forth in an
exhibit that is to be identified, attached to and made a part
of this Agreement before such services begin.
3.11. If more than one prime contract is to be awarded for
construction, materials, equipment and services for the
entire Project, designate a person or organization to have
authority and responsibility for coordinating the activities
among the various prime contractors.
3.12. Furnish to ENGINEER data or estimated figures as
to OWNER's anticipated costs for services to be provided
by others for OWNER (such as services pursuant to
paragraphs 3.7 through 3.11, inclusive) so that
ENGINEER may make the necessary findings to support
opinions of probable Total Project Costs.
3.13. Attend the pre -bid conference, bid opening, pre -
construction conferences, construction progress and other
job -related meetings and substantial completion
inspections and final payment inspections.
3.14. Give prompt written notice to ENGINEER
whenever OWNER observes or otherwise becomes aware
of any development that affects the scope or timing of
ENGINEER's services, or any defect or non-conformance
in the work of any Contractor.
3.15. Furnish, or direct ENGINEER to provide,
Additional Services as stipulated in paragraph 2.1 of this
Agreement or other services as required.
3.16. ENGINEER shall not be obligated to bear any of the
costs of compliance with this Section 3.
SECTION 4—PERIODS OF SERVICE
4.1. The provisions of this Section 4 and the various rates
of compensation for ENGINEER's services provided for
elsewhere in this Agreement have been agreed to in
anticipation of the orderly and continuous progress of the
Project through completion of the Operational Phase.
ENGINEER's obligation to render services hereunder will
extend for a period which may reasonably be required for
the design, award of contracts, construction and initial
operation of the Project including extra work and required
extensions thereto. If in Section 8 of this Agreement
specific periods of time for rendering services are set
forth or specific dates by which services are to be
completed are provided and if such dates are exceeded
through no fault of ENGINEER, all rates, measures and
amounts of compensation provided herein may be subject
to equitable adjustment.
4.2. The services called for in the Study and Report Phase
will be completed and the Report submitted within any
stipulated period indicated in Section 8 hereof after
written authorization to proceed with that phase of
Page 6 of 11 Pages
services which will be given by OWNER within seven (7) the last prime contract for construction, materials and
kw days after ENGINEER has signed this Agreement. equipment on which substantial completion is achieved.
4.3. After acceptance by OWNER of the Study and
Report Phase documents indicating any specific
modifications or changes in the general scope, extent or
character of the Project desired by OWNER, and upon
written authorization from OWNER, ENGINEER shall
proceed with the performance of the services called for in
the Preliminary Design Phase, and shall submit
preliminary design documents and a revised opinion of
probable Total Project Costs within any stipulated period.
4.4. After acceptance by OWNER of the Preliminary
Design Phase documents and revised opinion of probable
Total Project Costs, indicating any specific modifications
or changes in the general scope, extent or character of the
Project desired by OWNER, and upon written
authorization from OWNER, ENGINEER shall proceed
with the performance of the services called for in the
Final Design Phase; and shall deliver Contract Documents
and a revised opinion of probable Total Project Costs for
all work of Contractor(s) on the Project within any
stipulated period indicated in Section 8 hereof.
4.5. ENGINEER's services under the Study and Report
Phase, Preliminary Design Phase and Final Design Phase
shall each be considered complete when the submission
for that phase have been accepted by OWNER.
4.6. After acceptance by OWNER of the ENGINEERS
Drawings, Specifications and other Final Design Phase
documentation including the most recent opinion of
probable Total Project Costs and upon written
authorization to proceed, ENGINEER shall proceed with
performance of the services called for in the Bidding or
Negotiating Phase. This Phase shall terminate and the
services to be rendered thereunder shall be considered
complete upon commencement of the Construction Phase
or upon cessation of negotiations with prospective
Contractor(s).
4.7. The Construction Phase commences with the
execution of the first prime contract for the work of the
Project or any part thereof, and said Phase terminates
upon City Council approval of the final payment after
written recommendation by ENGINEER of final payment
on the last prime contract to be completed. Construction
Phase services may be rendered at different times if the
project involves more than one prime contract.
4.8. The Operational Phase may commence during the
Construction Phase and will terminate two (2) years after
the date of City Council approval of the final payment for
4.9. If OWNER requests significant modifications or
changes in the general scope, extent or character of the
Project, the time of performance of ENGINEER'S
services may be adjusted equitably to reflect the
additional time and expenses, if any, incurred by
ENGINEER to respond to the OWNER's request.
4.10. If ENGINEER's services for the Design or
Construction phases of the Project are delayed or
suspended for more than one year for reasons beyond
ENGINEER's control, the various rates of compensation
provided for elsewhere in this Agreement may be subject
to equitable adjustment upon submission of
documentation by ENGINEER to OWNER establishing
the basis for such adjustment.
4.11. In the event that the work designed or specified by
ENGINEER is to be furnished or performed under more
than one prime contract, or if ENGINEER's services are
to be separately sequenced with the work of one or more
prime contractors (such as in the case of fast -tracking),
OWNER and ENGINEER shall, prior to commencement
of the Final Design Phase, develop a schedule for
performance of ENGINEER's services during the Final
Design, Bidding or Negotiating and Construction Phases
in order to sequence and coordinate properly such
services as are applicable to the work under such separate
contracts.
SECTION 5—PAYMENTS TO ENGINEER
5.1. Methods of Payment for Services and Expenses of
ENGINEER.
5.1.1. For design, construction plan preparation,
construction document preparation (including bid
proposal, specifications, construction contract), periodic
inspection, and all other services to be rendered by
ENGINEER hereunder, as the same are set out in the
attached Exhibit, and as further set out in these
contractual documents, save and except for specified
special and additional services, OWNER shall pay to
ENGINEER an amount based on a lump sum and a cost
and time per diem basis in a total amount of $671,410.00.
For additional services authorized by OWNER in
accordance with Section 2 of this Agreement, OWNER
shall pay in accordance with N/A.
Page 7 of 11 Pages
5.2. Times of Payment.
ENGINEER shall submit monthly statements for the
services rendered and for the expenses and hourly costs
incurred. The statements will be based upon
ENGINEER's estimate of the proportion of the total
services actually completed at the time of the billing. All
monthly statements shall be in a form as specified by and
acceptable to OWNER. OWNER shall make payment
upon said statements within thirty (30) days following
receipt thereof.
SECTION 6—CONSTRUCTION COST AND
OPINIONS OF COST
6.1. Construction Cost.
The construction cost of the entire Project (herein referred
to as "Construction Cost") means the total cost to
OWNER of those portions of the entire Project designed
and specified by ENGINEER, but it will not include
ENGINEER's compensation and expenses, the cost of
land, rights -of -way, or compensation for or damages to
properties unless this Agreement so specifies, nor will it
include OWNER's legal, accounting, insurance
counseling or auditing services, or interest and financing
charges incurred in connection with the Project or the cost
of other services to be provided by others to OWNER
pursuant to Section 3, as applicable. [Construction Cost
is one of the items comprising Total Project Costs which
is defined in paragraph 1.2.6.]
6.2. Opinions of Cost.
It is understood by the Parties that ENGINEER has no
control over the cost of labor, materials, equipment or
services furnished by others, or over the Contractor(s)'
methods of determining prices, or over competitive
bidding or market conditions. Therefore, ENGINEER's
opinions of probable Total Project Costs and Construction
Cost provided for herein are to be made on the basis of
ENGINEER's experience and qualifications and represent
ENGINEER's best judgment as an experienced and
qualified professional engineer, familiar with the
construction industry; but ENGINEER cannot and does
not guarantee that proposals, bids or actual Total Project
or Construction Costs will not vary from opinions of
probable cost prepared by ENGINEER. If prior to the
Bidding or Negotiating Phase OWNER wishes greater
assurance as to Total Project or Construction Costs,
OWNER shall employ an independent cost estimator as
provided in paragraph 3.9.
SECTION 7—GENERAL CONSIDERATION
7.1. Termination.
7.1.1. The obligation to provide further services under
this Agreement may be terminated by either party upon
thirty (30) days' written notice in the event of substantial
failure by the other party to perform in accordance with
the terms hereof through no fault of the terminating party.
7.2. Reuse of Documents.
ENGINEER acknowledges that OWNER is a
governmental entity and that all Drawings, Specifications,
and other documents prepared or furnished by
ENGINEER (and ENGINEER's professional associates
and consultants) under this Agreement are instruments of
service in respect of the Project and property of the
OWNER and upon completion of the Project shall
thereafter be subject to the Texas Public Information Act
(Texas Government Code Chapter 552) and any other
applicable laws requiring public disclosure of the
information contained in said documents.
7.3. Insurance.
7.3.1. ENGINEER shall procure and maintain insurance,
in amounts acceptable to OWNER, for protection from
claims under workers' compensation acts, claims for
damages because of bodily injury including personal
injury, sickness or disease or death of any and all
employees or of any person other than such employees,
from claims or damages because of injury to or
destruction of property including loss of use resulting
therefrom, and from damages or claims as a result of acts
of errors or omissions of the ENGINEER made during the
performance of this contract. All liability insurance
required under this paragraph 7.3.1. shall include
OWNER, OWNER's agents and employees as additional
named insured and be with a company or companies
satisfactory to OWNER. All workers' compensation
coverage shall include in its provisions a waiver of any
rights of subrogation against the OWNER.
7.3.2. Before commencement of any work, the
ENGINEER shall submit written evidence that he and all
his subcontractors (if the ENGINEER employs
Page 8 of 11 Pages
A
subcontractors in the performance of this Agreement)
have obtained the minimum insurance required by the this
Agreement. Such written evidence shall be in the form of
a Certificate of Insurance executed by the ENGINEER's
insurance carrier showing such policies in force for the
specified period or by furnishing a copy of the actual
policy or policies. Each policy or certificate will bear an
endorsement or statement waiving right of cancellation or
reduction in coverage without thirty (30) days' notice in
writing to be delivered by registered mail to the OWNER.
7.3.3. The ENGINEER shall not commence work under
this Agreement until he has obtained at his expense all
insurance required under this section and such insurance
has been approved by the OWNER, nor shall the
ENGINEER allow any subcontractor to commence work
on any subcontract until all similar insurance required of
the subcontractor has been so obtained and approved.
Such insurance shall remain in full force and effect on all
phases of the work, whether or not the work is occupied
or utilized by the OWNER, until all work under the
Agreement is completed and has been accepted by the
OWNER.
7.3.4. Nothing contained in the insurance requirements
shall be construed as limiting the extent of the
ENGINEER's responsibility for payment of damages
resulting from his operations.
7.4. Controlling Law.
This Agreement is to be governed by the law of the state
of Texas. Venue shall lie exclusively in Tarrant County,
Texas for all state actions and in the Fort Worth Division
of the Central District of Texas for all federal actions.
7.5. Successors and Assigns.
7.5.1. OWNER and ENGINEER each is hereby bound
and the partners, successors, executors, administrators and
legal representatives of OWNER and ENGINEER (and to
the extent permitted by paragraph 7.5.2 the assigns of
OWNER and ENGINEER) are hereby bound to the other
party to this Agreement and to the partners, successors,
executors, administrators and legal representatives (and
said assigns) of such other party, in respect of all
covenants, agreements and obligations of this Agreement.
7.5.2. Neither OWNER nor ENGINEER shall assign,
sublet or transfer any rights under or interest in
(including, but without limitation, moneys that may
become due or moneys that are due) this Agreement
without the written consent of the other, except to the
extent that any assignment, subletting or transfer is
mandated by law or the effect of this limitation may be
restricted by law. Unless specifically stated to the
contrary in any written consent to an assignment, no
assignment will release or discharge the assignor from
any duty or responsibility under this Agreement. Nothing
contained in this paragraph shall prevent ENGINEER
from employing such independent professional associates
and consultants as ENGINEER may deem appropriate to
assist in the performance of services hereunder, provided
such independent associates or consultants are approved
in writing in advance by OWNER and are paid by
ENGINEER.
7.5.3. Nothing under this Agreement shall be construed to
give any rights or benefits in this Agreement to anyone
other than OWNER and ENGINEER, and all duties and
responsibilities undertaken pursuant to this Agreement
will be for the sole and exclusive benefit of OWNER and
ENGINEER and not for the benefit of any other party.
SECTION 8—SPECIAL PROVISIONS, SCHEDULES,
AND EXHIBITS
8.1. Special Provisions
Any other provisions of this Agreement or other
documents included by reference herein to the contrary
notwithstanding, the following provisions shall apply to
this Agreement and the respective duties and
responsibilities of OWNER and ENGINEER affected
thereby:
8.1.1. As to the contractual relationship between
ENGINEER and OWNER, ENGINEER is and shall be
considered in all things an independent contractor.
8.1.2. This contract shall not be subject to binding
arbitration.
8.1.3. OWNER reserves the right, with ENGINEER's
agreement, to consolidate any and all phases of
performance set out in the standard form contractual
documents. The consolidation of said services shall not in
any way affect the ENGINEER's responsibilities to
perform the services set out therein.
8.1.4. This Agreement may be terminated by the OWNER
hereto, with or without cause, upon ten (10) days' written
notice thereof. If this Agreement is terminated by the
Page 9 of 11 Pages
�'_R
OWNER without cause, the ENGINEER shall be paid for
services performed to termination date, including all
reimbursable expenses then incurred.
8.2. Schedules.
Where appropriate, the following time limitations for the
following phase(s) of services shall apply:
8.2.1. The Study and Report Phase Services/Preliminary
Design Phase Services shall be completed and all reports,
opinions of costs, documentation, contract documents,
and other tangible materials required under this
Agreement shall be completed and submitted by
ENGINEER before August 1, 2001.
8.2.2. The Final Design Phase Services/Bidding or
Negotiating Phase Services shall be completed and all
reports, opinions of costs, documentation, contract
documents, and other tangible materials required under
this Agreement shall be completed and submitted by
ENGINEER, before October 1, 2001, following written
authorization from OWNER to ENGINEER to proceed
with said phase(s) of services.
8.2.3. The Construction Phase Services shall begin, by or
before February 1, 2002, following written authorization
from OWNER to ENGINEER to proceed, and shall be
completed as reasonably soon thereafter as possible.
8.2.4. TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE IN THE
PERFORMANCE OF THE SERVICES UNDER THIS
AGREEMENT.
8.3. Exhibits.
The following exhibits are attached to and made a part of
this Agreement:
8.3.1. Exhibit A, ENGINEER's Scope of Services.
Provided, however, that where the terms and provisions of
the above -referenced exhibit(s) shall conflict with the
terms and provisions of this standard contract, this
standard contract shall control.
8.4. Professional Liability Insurance
ENGINEER shall maintain, at no expense to OWNER, a
professional liability (errors and omissions) insurance
policy placed with a company rated at least A by Best's
Key Rating Guide, authorized to do business in Texas, in
an amount not less than one million dollars ($1 million)
for each occurrence, one million dollars ($1 million) in
the aggregate. Such policy shall require the giving of
written notice to OWNER at least thirty (30) days prior
to cancellation, nonrenewal or material modification of
any policies, evidenced by return receipt or United States
certified mail. ENGINEER shall furnish OWNER with
copies of said policies or certificates evidencing such
coverage.
8.5. Entire Agreement.
This Agreement, together with the exhibits and schedules
identified above, constitute the entire Agreement between
OWNER and ENGINEER and supersede all prior or oral
understandings. This Agreement and said exhibits and
schedules may only be amended, supplemented, modified
or canceled by a duly executed written instrument.
8.6. Severability.
The invalidity of any provision of this Agreement shall
not affect the validity or enforceability of any other
provision of this Agreement.
8.7. Waiver.
The waiver of any breach of a term or condition of this
Agreement does not waive any other breach of that term
or condition or any breach of any other term or condition
of this Agreement.
('The remainder of this page was left blank intentionally)
Page 10 of 11 Pages
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have made and executed this Agreement as of the day and year first above
written.
OWNER:
CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS
By:
Pedram Farahnak, P.E.
Director of Public Works
By:
Billy Campbell
City Manager
By:
Rick Stacy
Mayor
Address for giving notices:
1400 Main Street, Suite 320
Southlake, Texas 76092
ATTEST:
City Secretary
(Original 1 of 1 Originals)
ENGINEER:
CHEATHAM AND ASSOCIATES
By:
Eddie Cheatham, P.E.
President
Address for giving notices:
1601 E. Lamar Blvd. Suite 200
Arlington, TX 76011
♦I _ A a
�-
NOW-,,
F: IWORDFORMSIStandard Form Agreement Owner -Engineer Prof Services.doc
Page 11 of 11 Pages
BASIC SERVICES
Attachment "A"
The projects which are to become a part of this engineering services agreement are grouped into
three categories as follows:
Category I:
Projects which are to be addressed first, and are related to the reconstruction of S.H. 114
The projects are:
Project No. 1 Utility relocations required at N. White Chapel and S.H. 114.
Project No. 2 Utility relocations required at N. Carroll and S.H. 114.
Project No. 3 Utility relocations required at Highland Ave. and S.H. 114.
Project No. 4 Proposed 20" water main along S.H. 114 from N. White Chapel
to Town Center, and connection to existing 20" line in F.M.
1709.
Category II:
Projects with funding for construction budgeted in the 2000/2001 CIP Budget. The
projects are:
Project No. 1 Sanitary sewer system in Pearson Lane and Pecan Acres
Additions.
Project No. 2 Southlake Woods lift station abandonment.
Project No. 3 12" water line from Pump Station No. 2 south along T.W. King
to the IBM Complex.
Project No. 4 8" water from Rainforest to S.H. 114.
Project No. 5 Water system in Lakewood Ridge Addition.
Category:
Projects with funding for engineering design only budgeted in the 2000/2001 CIP Budget.
The projects consist of sanitary sewer systems in the following additions:
Project No. 1
Garden Addition
Project No. 2
Heatherwood Estates
Project No. 3
Hershaw Estates
Project No. 4
Loma Vista Addition
Project No. 5
Royal Oaks Addition
Project No. 6
Twin Creeks Addition
BASIC SERVICES
Attachment "B"
ENGINEERING FEES:
The engineering fees for the subject projects shall be a lump sum fee as follows:
Category I•
Project No. 1 - $ 38,850.00
Project No. 2 - $ 28,150.00
Project No. 3 - $ 7,000.00
Project No. 4 - $ 61,500.00
Subtotal $ 135,500.00
Category 11:
Project No. 1 -
$ 22,200.00
Project No. 2 -
$ 13,320.00
Project No. 3 -
$ 6,290.00
Project No. 4 -
$ 19,980.00
Project No. 5 -
$ 45,730.00
Subtotal
$ 107,520.00
Category III:
Project No. 1 -
$ 33,300.00
Project No. 2 -
$ 24,750.00
Project No. 3 -
$ 15,000.00
Project No. 4 -
$ 16,650.00
Project No. 5 -
$ 13,600.00
Project No. 6 -
$ 16,500.00
Subtotal $ 119,800.00
SPECIAL SERVICES
Attachment "C"
SURVEYING FEES:
The surveying fees for the subject project, which include design surveys and construction staking,
shall be a lump sum fee as follows:
Category I:
Project No. 1
- $ 18,900.00
Project No. 2
- $ 13,650.00
Project No. 3
- $ 3,500.00
Project No. 4
- $ 29,750.00
Subtotal $ 65,800.00
Category II:
Project No. 1 - $ 10,800.00
Project No. 2
- $ 6,580.00
Project No. 3
- $ 3,510.00
Project No. 4
- $ 10,000.00
Project No. 5
- $ 21,250.00
Subtotal $ 52,140.00
Category III•
Project No. 1 -
$ 16,700.00
Project No. 2 -
$ 12,000.00
Project No. 3 -
$ 5,000.00
Project No. 4 -
$ 8,100.00
Project No. 5 -
$ 6,600.00
Project No. 6
- $8,100.00
Subtotal $ 56,500.00
Attachment "D"
ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COSTS:
Category I:
Project No. 1 - $ 525,000.00
Project No. 2 - $ 380,000.00
Project No. 3 - $ 95,000.00
Project No. 4 - $ 830,000.00
Subtotal $ 1,830,000.00
Category II:
Project No. 1
- $ 300,000.00
Project No. 2
- $ 180,000.00
Project No. 3
- $ 85,000.00
Project No. 4
- $ 270,000.00
Project No. 5
- $ 618,000.00
Subtotal $ 1,453,000.00
Category III:
Project No. 1
- $ 450,000.00
Project No. 2
- $ 334,500.00
Project No. 3
- $ 205,000.00
Project No. 4
- $ 225,000.00
Project No. 5
- $ 184,000.00
Project No. 6
- $ 222,500.00
Subtotal $ 1,621,000.00
SPECIAL SERVICES
Attachment "E"
Additional Fees:
The following additional fees may be required:
Geotechnical Fees $80,000.00
Preparation of 25 Easement Parcels $25,000.00
Right -of -Way Agent $15,000.00
SCHEDULES
Attachment "F"
The schedules vary for each of the categories, therefore each category has its own schedule as
follows:
Category I:
Category II:
Category III:
Preliminary Design complete by
Final Design complete by
Construction Phase to begin by
Preliminary Design complete by
Final Design complete by
Easements acquired by
Construction Phase to begin by
Preliminary Design complete by
Final Design complete by
Easements acquired by
Construction Phase to begin by
July 15, 2001
September 1, 2001
October 15, 2001
July 1 2001
August 15, 2001
November 15, 2001
December 15, 2001_
August 1
2001
October 1,
2001
January 1
2002
February
1, 2002
Attachment "G"
INTRODUCTION
The City of Southlake is growing at a very rapid rate. One of the primary concerns of the City
officials is to have adequate water supply, both in quality and quantity, to serve the Southlake
residents. Therefore, it is very important to provide proper planning to assure that the growth will
not overburden the water system.
Therefore, we are submitting this proposal for a Water System Master Plan. This plan will serve
several purposes. The first is to provide basic information about what types of water system demands
will be created by a growing population - unconstrained by lack of utilities or other physical
limitations.
The report presents findings of a computerized analysis of the existing system to determine what
improvements are needed to better serve existing customers, and provide adequate fire protection to
both commercial and residential development.
It presents recommendations for expanding the system to meet future demands - when to prepare for
system expansion and how those improvements may be funded. This report will be the cornerstone
for detailed planning of future water system improvements.
The City of Southlake is fortunate to have a comparatively well developed water system. The bulk
of the needed major components necessary to serve the existing population are in place. A relatively
small number of improvements to the existing distribution system will assure fully satisfactory service
to existing customers at reasonable rates.
The challenge will be to develop system expansions prior to the time of need - to prevent service
deficiencies for new or existing customers. The primary challenge will be keeping up with and/or
predicting at what rate the system needs to be expanded, and where the improvements are needed.
The following topics will be discussed and evaluated in the proposed water study.
SCOPE OF WORK
Background and History:
A somewhat brief description of the background of the City's water system will be presented. This
will be beneficial to new members of the City staff, and City Council, who are not aware of how the
City's water system has evolved into the current network of lines, storage tanks, and pumping
stations. The report will discuss how the City has managed to contract with the City of Fort Worth
for water supply, and also what efforts have been made to achieve a secondary source of supply.
1
Land Use/Population - Analysis and Projections:
There have been several studies prepared recently to explore the projected land use and population
figures for the City of Southlake. In 1999, the City updated the water and wastewater impact fees
charged to developers. That update was based upon the most recent land use and population
projects, which the City Planning Department adopted. Using those projections, a water and
wastewater plan was prepared to conform to the expected growth. In this proposed Water Master
Plan, the 1999 study will be updated, and the entire projections of expected growth will be presented
in the Master Plan.
There continues to be a considerable amount of commercial growth along S.H. 114, this could result
in a large burden on the water system for water supply to businesses, and fire protection. The timing
of the growth, and construction of water infrastructure has to be planned very carefully. The City
does not want the growth to be constrained by the lack of public utilities. It will be very helpful to
take advantage of the 1999 land use and population figures, and projections in planning for the timely
construction of the future water system components.
Criteria for System Design:
In this section of the Water Master Plan, the design criteria will be discussed and presented. This
criteria includes the average day per capita, the maximum day and maximum hour per capita of water
demands. In addition, the fire flows will be presented which will be used for system design. Other
design criteria includes storage, both ground and elevated, and pumping station design criteria.
It is very important that the water system maintain a minimum water pressure, and also not exceed
a pressure level which would damage fixtures in residences.
Other design considerations include minimum pipe sizes, types of pipe materials, valves, fire hydrants,
location of utilities in relation to other utilities and pavements, and maximum velocities in lines.
Once the criteria for the system has been established, the existing water system can be analyzed to
determine deficiencies, and the ultimate system can be determined.
Storage and Pumping:
One very important component of the water system is its storage tanks, both ground and elevated,
and its pump stations. In recent years, the City has acquired property and constructed two pumping
stations with ground storage tanks. This has been very beneficial in meeting the peak hour demands
of the system. It is important that the supply to a system be adequate to meet the maximum day
system demands, and the maximum hour demands come from storage. There are currently two 5.0
million gallon (MG) tanks at the Pearson Road site, and one 5.0 MG tank a the T.W. King site, with
a provision for a second tank.
0
There are also three 1.5 MG elevated tanks on the low pressure plane, and one 0.5 MG tank on the
high pressure plane. The water studies prepared for water impact fees have determined the size and
locations of storage tanks.
This information will be presented and discussed in the proposed Water Master Plan.
In addition, the pumping stations were discussed and constructed based upon studies which have been
performed in recent years. Again, this information will be compiled into the Master Plan.
Sources of Sunnly:
Currently the City of Southlake has a contract with the City of Fort worth for water supply. In the
past the City has explored other sources of supply such as the Trinity River Authority (TRA), and
the City of Grapevine.
The City of Fort Worth has an obligation to supply the City's water needs for the coming years,
however, a second transmission line is needed. Currently, the City's entire supply comes from the
City of Fort Worth's Alta Vista Facility, and one 30" pipeline feeds the entire City.
As a part of the proposed Water Master Plan, an alternate supply line will be evaluated. This would
be performed with the assistance of the City staff. Until this second supply line is in place, the City
must rely upon the one line for all of its water needs.
Water Distribution System Analysis:
Due to variations in the ground elevation of the City of Southlake, it was necessary to split the water
system into two pressure planes. Each system has been analyzed a number of times by the University
of Kentucky Hardy -Cross Program. This analysis was based upon the Land Use Plan of the City, and
the projected ultimate densities of population.
The ultimate water system maps, for both the high and low pressure planes, have been used to
determine the future system costs of constructing new distribution lines. These estimated costs were
used to calculate the water impact fees to be charged to new developments.
It is proposed that the system analysis will be updated, based upon the most recent land use trends,
and known developments, which are now being planned.
Also, fire protection is a major concern to everyone, and the City has always strived to maintain
adequate pressure, and fire flow, throughout the City. As a part of the system analysis being
proposed, fire flows will be placed upon the computer model of the water system at strategic places.
This simulation of fire demand will indicate if the existing, or the proposed, system can meet the
minimum criteria of the City staff. The proposed system will then be modified, if necessary, to assure
that the fire demands, can and will, be met.
The Master plan will include maps of the ultimate water system, for both pressure planes, as an
appendix to the report.
Capital Improvements:
In this section of the report, recommendations will be presented for water system improvements. This
will include supply water lines, storage tanks, pumps and/or pumping stations, and distribution lines.
These recommended improvements will be distributed over the next five years, and will include the
estimated cost of improvements. Exhibits will be prepared, such as spreadsheets and system maps,
which will illustrate the proposed improvements, the time schedule for construction, and the estimated
cost. The proposed improvements will be listed in order of the priority of each. This priority list will
be arrived at, with the assistance and concurrence of the City staff.
Report Summary:
A summary for the proposed system improvements will be prepared, along with a time schedule and
cost estimates. A brief discussion will be presented to provide the basis for the proposed system
improvements.
Maps and Exhibits:
In the appendix of the report, maps and exhibits will be provided which will include water system
maps, both existing and ultimate, and criteria such as land use and population projections. Any
additional maps or exhibits which would be beneficial to plan implementation or interpretation will
be included.
Schedule:
We are proposing that a draft copy of the Master Plan will be available for review by the City staff
within 90 calendar days. Once the draft report has been reviewed, we will prepare the final report
with maps and exhibits within 45 calendar days.
Fee for Services:
Our fee for preparation of the Master Plan is $14,150.00 which includes ten (10) copies of the final
report with exhibits and maps.
4
Project Reference Legend
EXHIBIT REFERENCE #
PROJECT
LOCATION
1
Utility relocation
SH 114 White Chapel and Carroll Projects
2
20" Trans. Water Line
SH 114 from Town Center to North White Chapel
3
Pearson Lane/Pecan Acres Sewer
North Pearson from Gray lane to S of Florence
4
Southlake Woods Lift Station Abandonment
South Peytonville
5
12" Water Line
TW King from Pump station #2 to IBM Complex
6
8" Water Line
From Rainforest Court to SH 114 (provide loop)
7
8" Water Line
Lakewood Ridge Addition
8
Garden Addition Sewer
Garden Addition
9
Heatherwood Estates Sewer
Heatherwood Estates
10
Hershaw Estates Sewer
Hershaw Estates
11
Loma Vista (West Side) Sewer
Loma Vista (West Side)
12
Royal Oaks Estates Sewer
Royal Oaks Estates
13
Twin Creek Estates Sewer
Twin Creek Estates
Prefect HAtArAncp Mac
City of Southlake, Texas
MEMORANDUM
May 1, 2001
To: Billy Campbell, City Manager
From: Mike Hutchison, Senior Civil Engineer, Ext. 2361
Subject: Award of bid for the construction of roadway improvements at South
Kimball Avenue from FM 1709 to Crooked Lane.
Action Requested: Award of bid to Sutton & Associates for the construction of roadway
improvements at South Kimball Avenue from FM 1709 to Crooked Lane.
Background
Information: The Council approved the construction of roadway improvements on this
portion of South Kimball as a part of the FY2000-2001 Capital
Improvements Program. Construction plans and specifications were
subsequently prepared by Bucher, Willis & Ratliff Corporation (BWR)
and reviewed by staff for this project.
This project involves constructing half of the ultimate 4-lane divided
section along South Kimball between FM 1709 and Crooked Lane while
utilizing the existing pavement during an interim time period until the
remainder of the ultimate section can be funded and constructed. In
addition, improvements will be made on the north side of FM 1709 by
constructing the ultimate street section as required by the Master
Thoroughfare Plan (6 lanes with left turn lane). Deceleration lanes will
also be installed along FM 1709.
The contractor has proposed completing the portion of the project between
FM 1709 and Crooked Lane within 200 calendar days, and complete the
portion in front of the new Intermediate / Middle School prior to August
15, 2001.
Bids were received on April 10, 2001. Three bids were received, with
Sutton & Associates being the low bidder. The bids have been reviewed
by BWR and City Staff, and are tabulated as follows:
Bidder Bid Amount including Alt. #1
Sutton & Associates $2,237,292.40
Sunmount Corporation. $2,337,147.30
Texas Sterling $2,386,424.25
Financial
Consideration: The bid amount is within the budget for this portion of the project.
Allocation of a 6% contingency for unanticipated construction related
items are also requested.
Citizen Input/
Board Review: None.
Legal Review: None.
Alternatives: The council may award or reject this bid.
Supporting
Documents: Location Map
Project Map
Project Schedule: The portion of the project from Crooked Lane to just north of the school
will be completed by August 15, 2000. A total of 288 days are allowed for
(4w the entire project, including the initial phase.
Project Completion Date
1. Approximately 800 feet south of August 15, 2001
intersection to Crooked Lane
(120 Calendar days)
2. Improvements at South Kimball and October 25, 2001
FM 1709 (70 calendar days)
3. Improvement at North Kimball and January 31, 2002
FM 1709 (98 calendar days)
Staff
Recommendation: Please place on the City Council Agenda for May 1, 2001 for Council
consideration and approval. Staff recommends that the bid be awarded to
Sutton & Associates in the amount of $2,237,292.40. In addition allocate
6% of construction amount ($140,000) for unanticipated construction
contingencies.
Staff Contact: Mike Hutchison, E.I.T., Senior Civil Engineer, Ext. 2361
Charlie Thomas, P.E., City Engineer, Ext. 2175
Pedram Farahnak, P.E., Director of Public Works, Ext. 2308
CC: Mike Patterson, Operations Manager, Ext. 2101
Valerie Bradley, Assistant to the Director, Ext. 2342
Ricky Black, Director of Public Safety, Ext. 2421
Marlin Price, Chief of Police, Ext. 2538
Greg Last, Director of Economic Development, Ext. 1671
Kimball Ave. Reconstruction
from F.M. 1709 to Crooked Lane
A
A
v
�
5-
W
x
rNi Z i
5� i
W
V i5
pt
in
Y
m`
;r
1
ii
y �
11i
........_mow.,
CROOKED LANE
t-
City of Southlake
• • Department of Planning
STAFF REPORT
April 27, 2001
CASE NO: ZA01-035
PROJECT: Lots 1 & 2. J.W. Hale No. 803 Addition
REQUEST: Felipe Gumicio is requesting plat showing approval.
ACTION NEEDED: Consider plat showing request.
ATTACHMENTS: (A) Background Information
(B)
Vicinity Map
(C)
Plans and Support Information
(D)
Plat Review Summary
(E)
Surrounding Property Owner Map
(F)
Surrounding Property Owner's Responses
(G)
Full Size Plans (for Commission and Council Members Only)
STAFF CONTACT: Dennis Killough (481-2073)
Tara Brooks (481-2079)
Case No.
ZA01-035
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
OWNER/APPLICANT: Felipe Gumucio
PURPOSE: The purpose of this request is to create two buildable residential lots and
fulfill the requirements of the zoning and subdivision ordinances with
regard to division of property within the "SF-20B" zoning district.
PROPERTY SITUATION: The property is located on the west side of Morningside Drive at the
intersection of Morningside Drive and Vino Blanc Court.
HISTORY: There is no recent development history.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Tracts lA2 and IA2C situated in the J.W. Hale Survey, Abstract No. 803
LAND USE CATEGORY: Medium Density Residential
CURRENT ZONING: "SF-20B" Single Family Residential District
P&Z ACTION: April 19, 2001; Approved (6-0) subject to Plat Review Summary No. 2, dated
April 12, 2001.
P&Z SPEAKERS: This information will be forwarded to Council before the meeting.
STAFF COMMENTS: Attached is Revised Plat Review Summary No. 2, dated April 27, 2001.
NACommunity Development\WP-FILES\MEMO\2001cases\01-035PS.doc
Case No.
ZA01-035
Attachment A
Page 1
Vicinity Map
Lots 1 & 21 JR. Hale No. 803 Addition
1000 0 1000 2000 3000 Feet
fa
Case No.
ZA01-035
Attachment B
Page 1
7
Case No.
ZA01-035
� !}` ' 9 f�I i p�' f �i ! I j ► 7I�x � ���!
I Is
elf
fill I
1__�
" •t �e � I � R � , 1 � � � t'r � {fir t
�j
tptH �::` i � {Irjs � i ' a�►;�� 4 � a� ,�, al , �� e
S('. _ ei'. iR JF O u ; R 5��• 5�3' � x
a
• i.e]'�•11e
SI
aa— —
�_ �/ ;lac I �•r
a
% is i
R R ��� !,• �i y s
tl
R
le
i W
: ION
•
s
h
ry
i
�
S
Attachment C
Page 1
PLAT REVIEW SUMMARY
Case No.: ZA01-035 Review No.: Two (Revised)
Project Name: Plat Showing — Lots 1& 2, J. W. Hale No. 803 Addition
APPLICANT:
Felipe Gumucio
106 Wilmington Court
Southlake, TX 76092
Phone: 817-329-2996
Fax:
Date of Review: 04/27/01
SURVEYOR/ENGINEER:
Loyd Bransom Surveyors, Inc.
1028 N. Sylvania Ave.
Fort Worth, TX 76111
Phone: 817-834-3477
Fax: 817-831-9818 Attn: Charles B. Hooks
CITY STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE ABOVE REFERENCED PROJECT RECEIVED BY THE CITY ON 04/02/01 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 TARA BROOKS at (817)481-2079.
The street name change from Carlisle Lane to Morningside Drive was not approved. Please
correct plat to show street name as Carlisle Lane.
Informational Comments:
Both lots must be tied to sewer prior to issuance of a building permit. Sewer is available along the east
side of Carlisle Lane.
A "Certificate of Taxes Paid" indicating that there are no delinquent taxes owed on the subject
property from each taxing authority must be provided to the City prior to filing this plat in the County
records. A copy of this information may be obtained from the Tarrant county Tax
Assessor/Collector's Office located at 100 E. Weatherford St. in Ft. Worth (across from the old red
courthouse). There is a service charge of $10 per account for this certificate. For more information
contact the Assessor/Collector's office at (817) 884-1103.
Original signatures and seals will be required three blackline mylars prior to filing the plat. Also
required are two sets of owner's dedications and notaries (8.5" x 11" or 14" paper) with original
signatures and seals on each. Mylars will not be accepted if any erasures or original ink, other than
signatures or seals, appear on the plat.
* A Developers Agreement is required prior to construction of any public infrastructure. The
Developer's Agreement for this addition should consider streets, drainage, park dedication
requirements and fees, off -site sewer extensions, off -site drainage and utility easements and impact
fees.
Denotes Informational Comment
Case No. Attachment D
ZA01-035 Page 1
Surrounding Property Owners
Lots 1 & 2, J.W. Hale No. 803 Addition
Case No.
ZA01-035
Attachment E
Page 1
� Surrounding Property Owners
Lots 1 & 2, J.W. Hale No. 803 Addition
Property Owner
Zoning
Land Use Description
Acreage
1. J. Peters
1. SF-20A
I. Medium Density Residential
1.
0.77
2. W. Minor
2. SF-20A
2. Medium Density Residential
2.
0.33
3. R. Reid
3. SF-20A
3. Medium Density Residential
3.
0.45
4. E. Odette
4. SF-20A
4. Medium Density Residential
4.
0.47
5. M. Arst
5. SF-20A
5. Medium Density Residential
5.
0.46
6. J. D'Amico
6. SF-20A
6. Medium Density Residential
6.
0.46
7. B. Allen
7. SF-20A
7. Medium Density Residential
7.
0.45
8. G. Masek
8. SF-20A
8. Medium Density Residential
8.
0.46
9. R. Craemer
9. SF-20A
9. Medium Density Residential
9.
0.46
10. E. Gunderson
10. SF-20A
10. Medium Density Residential
10.
0.44
11. R. Johnson
11. R-PUD
11. Medium Density Residential
11.
0.61
12. D'Lightful Homes
12. R-PUD
12. Medium Density Residential
12.
0.52
13. Mitcham Homes
13. R-PUD
13. Medium Density Residential
13.
0.35
14. C. Keeter
14. R-PUD
14. Medium Density Residential
14.
0.35
15. K. Scjumacher
15. R-PUD
15. Medium Density Residential
15.
0.50
16. K. Thao
16. R-PUD
16. Medium Density Residential
16.
0.52
17. Versailles Ltd
17. R-PUD
17. Medium Density Residential
17.
0.52
18. Clairmark Homes
18. R-PUD
18. Medium Density Residential
18.
0.40
19. D. Larry
19. R-PUD
19. Medium Density Residential
19.
0.50
20. T. Hale
20. R-PUD
20. Medium Density Residential
20.
0.40
Case No.
Attachment E
ZA01-035 Page 2
Surrounding Property Owner Responses
O.W. Knight, Abst. 899, "AG” to "SF-1A"
NOTICES SENT: Nineteen (19)
RESPONSES: Two (2) responses were received from within the 200' notification
area:
• Heath D. Meyers, 520 Northwood Trail, Southlake, TX,
opposed, " The lighting of the lot may be a nuisance. The soil
has been unstable and needs to be checked (plausibly)."
(Received March 19, 2001)
• Kim and Patti -Kay W. Head, 501 Clayton Court, Southlake,
TX, in favor, "strongly residential area." (Received March 20,
2001)
Case No. Attachment F
ZA01-024 Page 1
City of Southlake, Texas
RESOLUTION NO. 01-022
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS, OPPOSING LEGISLATION DESIGNED TO
LIMIT THE USE OF MORATORIUMS.
WHEREAS, the City of Southlake, Texas is charged with adopting and enforcing
reasonable development regulations that are designed to protect the citizens and the property
within the City; and
WHEREAS, the adoption of zoning, platting and other development related regulations
by their nature require a minimum period of time to allow for citizens and developer input,
public hearings, and staff and board review prior to enactment by the City Council; and
WHEREAS, depending upon the issues involved and the potential adverse effects of
development pending the enactment of necessary development regulations, the City Council
may from time to time determine in its reasonable discretion to place reasonable limitations on
development pending the review and enactment of such requirements; and
WHEREAS, the City is of the opinion that the reasonable use of moratoriums for the
purpose of maintaining the status quo during the adoption of necessary development
regulations benefits the citizens and protects property within the City; and
WHEREAS, House Bill 2117 pending before the Texas Legislature would severely
limit cities' use of moratoriums;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS:
SECTION 1.
That the City Council hereby opposes the adoption of HB 2117 and any legislation
having the effect of limiting a city's reasonable use of moratoriums.
SECTION 2.
That the City Manager is directed to send a letter to our State representatives and
senators opposing the enactment of HB 2117 or any other legislation having the effect of
limiting a city's reasonable use of moratoriums.
City of Southlake, Texas
Resolution No. 01-022
Page 2
SECTION 3.
That this resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval.
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SOUTHLAKE ON THIS DAY OF , 2001.
Mayor Rick Stacy
ATTEST:
Sandra L. LeGrand
City Secretary
FORT WORTH OFFICE:
6000 Western Place, Suite 200
I-30 at Bryant -Irvin Road
Fort Worth, Texas 76107-4654
Voice: (817) 332-2580
Toll Free: (800) 318-3400
Fax: (817) 332-4740
nail: toase@toase.com
ebsite: %vw%v.toase.com
WAYNE K. OLSON
EXT. 210
wolsont5toasezom
Ta.ylor; Olson Adkins Sralla"Elam
T..L.P ( t
Attorneys Counselors
MAR 5 NO
Billy Campbell
City of Southlake
1400 Main Street
Suite 460
Southlake, Texas 76092
February 28, 2001
RE: Proposed Legislation Limiting Moratoriums
DENTON OFFICE:
620 WEST HICKORY
DENTON, TEXAS 76201
VOICE: (940) 383-2674
METRO: (972) 434-3834
FAX: (940) 898-0118
Dear Billy:
It has come to my attention that HB 2117 was filed earlier this week to restrict cities'
authority to enact development moratoriums. This letter will summarize the bill and discuss
its impact.
(iw Subject matter of moratoriums: The bill limits the permissible reasons for
adopting moratoriums to situations involving shortages of public facilities. A city may
adopt a moratorium if the city council makes written findings demonstrating that the
moratorium is necessary to prevent a shortage of essential public facilities (water, sewer
and streets) that would otherwise occur during the effective period of the moratorium. The
city must show that new development will create a need beyond existing capacity and must
limit the moratorium to the area where a shortage of essential public facilities would occur.
A moratorium that it not based on a shortage of water, sewer and. street facilities may be
justified only by demonstrating a compelling need for other public facilities, including police
and ire facilities. A "compelling need" is deer,ed to exist only if the failure to provide the
public facilities would result in a clear and imminent dander to public health and safety.
The city must also prove that allowing development under existing regulations will cause
irrevocable public harm.
Moratoriums are currently governed by case law, which has allowed cities to adopt
moratoriums of a reasonable duration while the city addresses a matter within its police
power. More and more cities are using moratoriums to temporarily maintain the status quo
until a review and amendment of development regulations can occur. The purpose of
moratoriums is to give cities a reasonable opportunity to review and revise development
regulations without numerous additional applications being filed which would undermine
the purpose of the revisions. HB 2117 would limit moratoriums to narrow circumstances
relating to shortages of public facilities and therefore would prohibit many of the types of
moratoriums that have been enacted by cities in the past. Further, additional notice
W:\MunieipaRMERGE\Moratorium.Final.wpd
February 28, 2001
Page 2
requirements in the bill will allow more time for the filing of permit applications in an attempt
to allow development of a project under existing regulations.
Notice requirements: Under this bill, before a city may adopt a moratorium, the
city council must hold one public hearing. The bill implies that the moratorium must be
adopted by an ordinance which must be given two readings, at least one week apart. In
addition, the planning and zoning commission must hold a public hearing. Notice of a
public hearing (it is not clear whether the statute refers to the city council hearing or the
planning and zoning commission hearing) must be published in a newspaper at least 15
days before the hearing.
Currently, the only notice requirement that applies to adoption of a moratorium is the
72-hour posting requirement under the Open Meetings Act. The planning and zoning
commission is not required to hold public hearings on moratorium ordinances. The effect
of the bill would be to extend the current three-day notice for posting the city council
agenda to at least 22 days (15 days published notice before a public hearing and a second
reading of the ordinance by the city council at least one week after the first reading).
Term of moratorium: The bill limits moratoriums to 120 days unless a city extends
the moratorium. Extension requires a public hearing, with notice published in a newspaper
at least 30 days beforehand. The city council must also make written findings identifying
the problem requiring the need for an extension, describing the progress made and
specifying a new expiration date.
Except for the 30-day notice publication requirement, the bill is generally consistent
with most cities' practice. It is always important to limit the time periods of moratoriums
and to extend the moratoriums only if necessary to complete work on studying an issue
and enacting amendments to city ordinances.
Appeal: The bill requires moratoriums to provide a procedure for an owner to seek
a waiver" from the moratorium for his property by claiming a right under a development
agreement or a protected or vested right, or by providing the public facilities that are the
subject of the moratorium at the landowner's cost.
This is consistent with most cities' practice, which is to provide an appeal procedure
for an owner who claims a legal right to proceed. In many cases moratorium ordinances
adopted by cities have also provided for relief from a moratorium where the proposed
development is consistent with the cities' goals.
In summary, HB 2117 will severely limit cities' authority to enact moratoriums. In
essence, it allows adoption of a moratorium only where there is a crisis situation involving
shortages of public facilities. There will be virtually no ability to enact a moratorium to
maintain the status quo while studying and addressing development issues that do not
relate to shortages of public facilities. In addition, landowners will have at least three
W:\Municipat\MERGEWoratorium.Final.wpd
J//- y
a
February 28, 2001
Page 3
weeks notice of the adoption of a moratorium. Therefore, in the limited cases where a
moratorium could be adopted, it is likely that many more development applications will be
filed in order to attempt to vest the project under existing regulations.
I am attaching a copy of HB 2117 for your convenience. You may wish to bring this
matter to the attention of the city council. Please feel free to contact me if you wish to
discuss this matter.
WKO/kb
W: Wlu nicipalWIERGEWIoratodum.Final.wpd
Very truly yours,
/J/ e—I - e: �� K-1 — —
Wayne K. Olson
Read Bill - HB 2117 - As Filed
Bill Number: TX77RHB 2117
Filed: 02-26-2001
Author: Walker
A BILL TO BE ENTITLED
1 AN ACT
2 relating to the imposition by a municipality of a moratorium on
3 property development in certain circumstances.
4 BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS:
5 SECTION 1. Chapter 212, Local Government Code, is amended by
6
adding Subchapter E to read as follows:
SUBCHAPTER
E. MORATORIUM ON PROPERTY
DEVELOPMENT
IN CERTAIN
7
8
CIRCUMSTANCES
g
Sec.
212.131. DEFINITION In this'subchapter,
"essential
10
public facilities"
means water or sewer
facilities
or stream
11
improvements
provided by a municipality
or private
utility_
12
Sec.
212,132. MORATORIUM ON PROPERTY
DEVELOPMENT
la1 FqK
13
purposes of
this subchapter,municipality
is considered
to have
irwosed a
mo r torium on property development
if
the municipality
14
15
routinely
delava the issuance of or stops
issuing
permits.
authorizations
or approvals necessary
for the subdivision
of. site
16
17
planning of
or constructi^^ nn real r,rooerty.
18
(b)
A municipality is * considered
to have
imposed a
19
moratorium
on property development if
the municipality
denies or
20
delays a permit
authorization or approval
because
the permit,
21
authorization,or
annroval is inconsistent
with
applicabig
22
statutes,
rules or ordinances includina
zonina
ordinances.
23
S c
212,133, PROCEDURE FOR ADOPTING
MORATORIUM.
A
24
municipalltv
ma ot adopt a moratorium
on property
development
1
1 unless the municipality:
2 (1) complies with the notice and hearing procedures
3 prescribed by Section 212 134• and
4 12) makes written findinas as provided by Section
5 212,135,
6 Siec 212 134 NOTICE AND PUBLIC HEA_RTNG REOUTRE*iENTS. (a1
7 Before a mora
8 municipality mus conduct public hearings as provided by this
Read Bill - HB 2117 - As Filed
Page 2 of 5
9
10
section.
(b)
Dartlesan
A public ust provide municipal residents
opportunity to be heard.
and
11
12
affected
r>ublish notice
of the time and place of a hearina in a newspape
of.
13
ceneral circulation
in the municipality before the 15th_day
before
14
the date of
the hearina.
15
(c)
One public hearing must be held before the cover
'n
16
body of the
municipality. Another public hearina must be
17
before the
municipal zonine commission if the municipality
has a
18
zoning commission.
law does not have a zoning
19
(d)
If a general municipality
20
commission,
two public hearings ated by at least 14 days
must
21
be held before
the aovernina body of the municipalitv:_
22
(e)
Before an ordinance adopting a moratorium -pay be
23
immosed, the
ordinance must be given at least two readings by
the
the municipality, The readings must be separated
24
covernina
body of
25
by at least
seven days._
26
Sec.
212.135,JUSTIFICATION FOR MORATORIUM• WRITTEN FINDINGB
27
R OUIRED
(a) If a municipality adopts a moratorium on vr_overty
2
1 development the moratorium may be jugtified by demonstratina a
2 need., t short-ae of essential public facilities that
3 would otherwise occur durina the effective period of the
q moratorium The municiDalitv mnar issue written findsnag based on
5 reasonablyavailable information'The written findings must
6 include a summary of:
7 (1) evidence demonstratina the extent of need beyond
8 the estimated capacity of existing tial public facilities that
9 , expected to result from new property development including
10 idpnti fvina•
11 (A) anv essacilities currently
12 Qgeratina beyond capacity:
13 (B) the portion of that capacity committed to
14 development: and
15 (C) the impact fees allocated to address the
16 need,
sy �
Read Bill
- BB 2117 - As Filed_
17
evidence
demonstrating
that the moratorium is
'
lg
----^^ably limited to•
1 areas of the
municipality where a shortage
19
20
of essential public
facilities would
otherwise occur: and
21
(B)
2roverty that
has not been approved for
22
development because
of the insufficiency
of existing essential
23
public facilities:
and
24
(3) evidence
demonstrating
that the housin9__a_f>d
25
economic development
needs of the affected
area have been
26
acco iodated as much
as possible by
any proarams that allocate
27
remainino essential
public facilities capacity
3
1
(p) A moratorium
that is not
based on a shortage
of
2
essential public facilities
may be
Justified only
by
demonstrating
3
a compelling need c
other public
facilities including
police and
4
fire facilities For
purposes of
this subsection
a
comoellina
5
need for public facilities
is established
if the
failure
to provide
6
those publicfacilities
would result
in a clear
and imminent
danger
7
to public health and
safety, The
municipality must
issue
written
8
findi,cs based on reasonably
available
information
The written
9
findings must include
a summary of:
10
(1) evidence
demonstrating
that applying
existing
11
development ordinances
or regulations
and other
applicable
law is
12
inadecuate to prevent irrevocable
public harm from development
in
13
affected aeoaranhical
areas;
14
(21 evidence
demonstrating
that the
moratorium
is
15
sufficiently limited
to ensure that
a needed supply
of affected
16
nousina types and the
ply of commercial
and industrial
17
facilities within or
in proximity
of the municipality
are not
lg
unreasonably restricted
by the adoption of the
moratorium;
demonstrating
that alternative
methods
19
(3) evidence
20
hievina the objectives
of the
moratorium are
unsatisfactory:
21
(4) evidence
demonstrati^^
that the
public
harm
outweighs
the adverse
22
resultina from failing
to impose
a moratorium
23
impact on other affected
local governments resulting
from im o� sing
24
the moratorium including
^ ublic
harm resulting
from:
25
(A)
shifts in
demand for housing
economic
JH 8
Read Bill - BB 2117 - As Filed
Page 4 of 5
26 dev_elopment publ " services and orooerty suitable
27 for development: and
4
1
(B) the overall
impact of the moratorium on
2
pov,tation distribution; and
3
(51 evidence demonstrating
that the municipality has
4
developed a working plan and time
schedule for achieving the
5
obiectives of the moratorium
6
Spec 212.136, EXPIRATION
OF MORATORIUM• EXTENSION (a) A
7
moratorium adopted under this
subchapter expires on the 120th__day
8
after -the date the moratorium
is adopted unless the municipality
9
extends the moratorium bv•
10
(t) holding a public
hearing on the proposed extension
11
of the moratorium: and
12
(2) adoptina written
findinas that:
13
(A) identify
the problem reguirine the need for
14
extendina the moratorium:
15
(D) describe
the reasonable progress made to
16
alleviate the problem; and
17
(C) specify
a definite duration for the renewal
1s
period of the moratorium.
19
(b) A municipality proposing
an extension of a moratorium
20
must 12ublighin a newspaper
of general circulation in the
21
municipality not later than the
30th_day before the date of the
P2
heari na ream red by Subsection
( a) .
23
Sec, 212,137, WAIVER PROCEDURES
REOUIRRn_ A moratorium
24
adopted under this subch2ter
must provide a procedure that permits
25
a landowner to apply for a waiver from the moratorium relating to
P6
the 1 ndown er's property bv:
a right
obtained under a development
27
(t) claiming
5
1
agreement:
2
(2) claiming a protected
or vested right: �r
-,�- 9
Read Bill - BB 2117 - As Filed
-Page 5 of 5
M
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
(3) providing the public facilities that are the
subiect of the moratorium at the landowner's cost
Sec 212.138, JUDICIAL REVIEW (a) A landowner aggrieved by
litv's adoption of a moratorium under this suar may
file an action in district court to contest the adoption of the
moratoriumnot later th-n the 30th day after the- date the ordinance
imposina the moratorium is adopted-
(b) The court shall award to the prevailing party in an
actionder this section reasonable attorney's fees incurred in
the trial and appeal of the action.
S'ec 212 139. EFFECT ON OTHER LA67 n moratori um adopted
under this subchapter does not affect the rinhts a guired under
Chapter 245.
SECTION 2. Section 395.076, Local Government Code, is amended
to read as follows:
Sec. 395.076. MORATORIUM ON DEVELOPMENT PROHIBITED. A
moratorium may not be placed on new development for the purpose of
awaiting the completion of all or any part of the process necessary
to develop, adopt, or update land use assumptions a capital
imr)rovements plan, or an 144%01 impact fee.
SECTION 3. This Act takes effect immediately if it receives
a vote of two-thirds of all the members elected to each house, as
provided by Section 39, Article III, Texas Constitution. If this
Act does not receive the vote necessary for immediate effect, this
Act takes effect September 1, 2001.
6
a
City of Southlake, Texas
RESOLUTION NO. 01-023
F A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS, OPPOSING SENATE BILL 1398 AND ANY
LEGISLATION CREATING A COMPENSABLE TAKING IN
CONNECTION WITH ZONING MATTERS.
WHEREAS, the City of Southlake, Texas is charged with adopting and enforcing
reasonable zoning and land use regulations within the City; and
WHEREAS, since 1927, the State of Texas had provided for and authorized
municipalities to utilize legitimate police powers in regulating land uses through zoning; and
WHEREAS, as provided in Section 211.004 of the Texas Local Government Code, the
purpose of municipal zoning regulations is to lessen congestion in the streets, secure safety
from fire, panic, and other dangers, promote health and the general welfare, provide adequate
light and air, prevent the overcrowding of land, avoid undue concentration of population, or
facilitate the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewers, schools, parks, and other
public requirements; and
WHEREAS, the United States Supreme Court and the Texas Supreme Court have
adopted specific Constitutional guidelines which govern the review of zoning regulations that
might constitute a taking of property; and
WHEREAS, through the exercise of a municipality's regulatory authority,
compensation is not required under the United States Constitution or the Texas Constitution;
and
WHEREAS, Senate Bill 1398 proposes to require municipalities to pay compensation
to property owners for decreases in property value caused by valid municipal zoning
regulations; and
WHEREAS, Senate Bill 1398 would compel municipalities to conduct costly, time-
consuming real estate appraisals in connection with many proposed zoning changes; and
WHEREAS, Senate Bill 1398 would severely impair the ability of municipalities to
make reasonable zoning decisions that balance the public interest against private property
rights; and
T-1
City of Southlake, Texas
I Resolution No. 01-023
Page 2
WHEREAS, Senate Bill 1398 would undermine the intent of comprehensive plans of
municipalities; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Southlake is of the opinion that Senate
Bill 1398 would substantially limit the ability of municipalities to make land use decisions that
are in the best interest of the health, safety, and welfare of its citizens;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS:
SECTION 1.
That the City Council hereby opposes the adoption of SB 1398 and any legislation that
would create a compensable taking in connection with the adoption of legitimate zoning
regulations.
SECTION 2.
That the City Manager is directed to forward a copy of this resolution to our State
representatives and senators opposing the enactment of SB 1398 or any other legislation
creating a compensable taking in connection with the adoption of legitimate zoning regulations.
SECTION 3.
That this resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval.
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SOUTHLAKE ON THIS DAY OF , 2001.
ATTEST:
Sandra L. LeGrand
City Secretary
Mayor Rick Stacy
S5 -A
ADORM
1�dM fr1II�w�ir
500 THROIXMMTON STRUT
FORTwolt1% Tvw 76102-3821
10 WESTr'SUM, Suitc 700
%,oRTWOMI, TOW 76102470D
VWtYK R. OISON
Err- 2V
wokonAtoase.com
TaLnr It A ` 11g )fin
it<tcomeys "r
L.6s►flSe)u 3
April 28, 2001
viA FAX TRANSMISSION
Billy Campbell
.,.r - - ,
City of 'Rem I+hl-k-
14Q0 ".".aiin Street
Suite 460
jouthroke, 1 t:x&$ 76092'
RE: Senate Bits 1398
Dear Billy:
Tnr ono�am lG. \ 711•�_4 CLA
•,.,��aws.w ova rl .wr �+....
(800)318-3400
FACSMOLK (817) 3324740
o
6.'3 W.CST ujC -VoRy
DUMN. Uw 76201
METRO (972) 434-3834
FACH 1a.E (940)119"1I3
As vnt i may have read in the newspaper, Senate Bill 1398. relating to the authority
y f the gv,�.�iri iii ig F►Qdy of a rr!uriiC.ms�iity to change preyiQusly adopted zoning Mulations,
passed hhe Senate Tuesday by voice vote- Only tt`1e rneMber_ voteed against s- usrenrling
`me rules. All effort r rust now by fbe-ussd or, tiie l louse as th:s. b.'l1 ill Ilkyly be rgftrred to
Land and Resource Management Committee.
This bill is not good for cities and we must make every effort to impress house
committee members that passage of this bill would unfavorably impact zoning andfor
rezoning with the city. If this bill becomes law, cities would be prohibited from rezoning
property without the onsent of the property owner unless it pays compensation for any
decrease in value in excess of 25%.
I have attached a copy el t; re bill which was er•-gr. fls� by tl� Se^a#e, L":e w ll
inform you when the bill is posted for hearing. In the meantime, please begil r senving
letters and making telephone calls immediately.
Please call my office if you would like further information or clarification concerning
the impact of this bill.
\,,, tri,: � yours
Wayne K. Olson
WK01Kt)
w:wtuntdpanl�rs,�aa.vvtw.s=r►.wpo
.-��-sv+ a+iai = eau i.3�b - �slrl�dVz5Ti5
Bill Numter: TX77RSS 1398 bate: 64-25-2661
Page i of 4
I
A SILL TO BE ENTITLED
AN ACT
E
relating to the authority of the governing body of a municipality
a
to change previously adopted zoning regulations.
4
BE IT _ MACTED BY THE LEC713LATURE OF THE STATE Or T: XAS:
5
SECTION 1. Section 211.003, Local Government Code, is
6
amended by adding S =tisection (a) v- .ee as follvws-.
7
(d) Notwithstanding any other provision of this sukmhapter,
e
the covernino bodv pf A Munici-,alit, may _ chango the zoning
S
classific_ation of a property that results in a diminution of more
IV
than 25 pereent of the orocertv's value unteaee
11
(li the owner of the property:
Iz
(Al waives any right to object to the proposed
i3
^h.A i—
14
(8) fails to file a written objection with the
15
covernine bed._after th,a,-dats tee vav"ning
i6
body notifies the ogopetty owner of the proposed change; or
17
(2 ) the coverni nn hotly c-ompa«ee rwz mop_ ty
is
for the diminution in value resulting from the Change as determined
15
b�(_
(A) an agreement with the property Owner; or
21
(B) a proceeding governed by Chapter 21,
22
Property Code
23
SECTION 2, Subchapter A, Chapter 21, Property Code, is
24
amen4gd by amending Section 21.003 an: adding 3ec;Zjoh 21.004 cc
Z5
read a3 follows:
1
x see. 21.003. DISTRICT COURT AUTHORITY. A district Court may
2 deYtr.rmine all issues, including tha authority tfa ccSrxdwemn property
D and the assessment of damages, in any suit filed under this chapter
e and &ny.suit filed:
5 11) in which this state, a political Subdivision Of
6 this state, a person, an association of versons. or a Corbnrarion
is b [i.dtty; and
n iiwww.telicon-com%htbin/web d=t.com?TX77RSB01398 ENG
04/25/2001
voarl R,11 — SA 1398 - EnarOSSed
8
(-,) that .n;,lsoz a cle1T for or_o_nerty or for damages
9 to property occupied by the party under the Party" omsnent domain
.unction to prevent the party from entering
10 au:hority oc wQr ar. lr., ...__--•-
11 or using the property under the party's eminen[ domain aut,,ority.
of nee, psz�CEEDINGB REG DING CHANGE OF ONING
iL
.,• - 7.GS hr the
13 CLASSIFICATION. A roceedln filed under ti�i: c
1: Mlrnnf.P. of determinin the dimination Of .
et 's value under
Cal <oYErnmen� Co -A- i e a r.ndemnation or
15 Section 211.003 d' L - --
16 emin� enL domain proceeding under this Chapter for the sal- u ose
17 of ritisf Inc tht PrOr,vds e e
..,a by this chapteY n S
AtoceedLnas, the condemnet or pecuirinq entity is the munici ii�
19 the a F,6�r 'o -
isthe n eeerty for which o is e
20 raelaesified and the eo e e on i the cnan in --
^« ro �. arnin,. ciasaificat n_
22
SECTION 3. Subsection (a), section .1.4111, °�orerTy code:
23 tc amended to read as follows:
24 -- ta) A governmental entity with eminent d„�.tn authority that
25 wants to acquire real property for a public use or chance a
ahatt disclose to the property
26 AYaperLV°S aOhi�+Q ,��me�.iG9zz
2
i owner at the time an offer to purchase Or o herwise co ensate is
2 made any aeQ all existing appraio l reports produced or acquired by
3 the governmental entity relating specitically to the owner's
4 propetLY
and used in 'etc.--i sing the final valuation offer.
5 SECTION d. Section 21.012, property Code, Is amended to read
g as rolLows:
7 Sec. 21.012. CONDEMNATION PETITION. (a) If the ;)nits.:
Mates. t►,_P It teo a political Subdivision of this state, a
airr , wt
inn
g corporation with eminent domain authority, or ar ` a7 ter
10 1mPnrrnJement. or water power control district created by law wants
a r,rene�ty's
11 to acquire zeal property foe p•,_�.blic uzc or chance --
12 .onina claesifica ion but is unable to agree with the owner of the
the demntn_+ entity may begin
13 propBrtY on the amQunF e£ �aY=y==• ---
con
�T an»xc0 c
rite.Yt Pl1it1%�w7���13 •.
�� — S
0
)a a Ccndemnation proceeding by :fling a petition In the proper court.
iS (}'! The P-mt t;�n murt]
,r 1E tl) describe the property to be condemned or to be
17 reclassified under a different_zonino classification:
la (2) state the purpose for which the entity intends to
If? use the property or for which the property's Zoning Is to be
2v changed;
Z1 (3) state the name of the owner of the property it the
23 (4) state that the entity and the property owner are
zn unatht a to agree an the daMarTce
25 SECTION 3. 5ubtection (a), Section 21.021, Property Code, is
ze amended to read as rollows:
3
I (a) Aster the special commitaionert have made an award in a
2 eondgmnatlen nroc.eee-1 no. except as provided by gubeertlon (c) of
Weis section, the condemnor may take possession of the condemned
4 property or change the zoning classification of the property
S perxring the results of further litigation if the condemnor:
F: (1) pays to the property Owner the amount of damaoes
I aW coats awarded by the special commiasionera Or deposits that
B amount of money with the court subject to the order of the property
owner.
10 (2) d"G its with the court either the amount of money
Ti ,swarttne nv rnp Ananial rnmmiAoie rA an ja"IP6 or s e�,_ery r,gn it
12 the same amount issued by a surety company qualified to do business
13 in this statc, conditioned to secure the payment of an award of
i9 damages by the court in excesn Of the aware of the apeclal
is commissioners: and
Io (3) executes a fund that has two or more good and
0 solvent sureties approved by the judge of the court in which the
1` pZoac=Ing Is psndin g and con'ditio.,^ ..o sacurz ....z payment o:`
It additional coats that may be awarded to the property owner by the
L
sip:lfw'wsii.taicon-cofw i r' c r d xt.cm"iXi7Fc$Bvi338 ENG
JST �
Read BiII - SB 1398 - Engrossed
Page d of d
,5 - -'/
TOTFI- P.06
City of Southlake, Texas
MEMORANDUM
April 26, 2001
TO: Billy Campbell, City Manager
FROM: Charlie Thomas, City Engineer, 481-2175
SUBJECT: Authorize the Mayor to execute a residential developer's agreement for High
Point Addition.
Action Requested: Authorize the Mayor to execute a residential developer's agreement for High
Point Addition.
Background
Information: The Planning and Zoning Commission approved the final plat for High Point
Addition on April 5 (7-0). The development consists of 22 lots located on
the west side of Shady Oaks Drive, 1,000 feet north of FM 1709. The
developer's agreement is the City's standard residential developer's
agreement covering the construction of public infrastructure.
Financial
Considerations: None
Citizen Input/
Board Review: The Park Board recommended a park fee in the amount of $33,000.
Legal Review: This is the City's standard residential developer's agreement originally
drafted by the City Attorney.
Alternatives: Approve it, deny it, or modify it.
Supporting
Documents: Agreement
Plat Exhibit
Staff
Recommendation: Please place on City Council agenda for May 1, 2001 for Council
consideration and approval.
HIGH POINT ADDITION
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPER AGREEMENT
An Agreement between the City of Southlake, Texas, hereinafter referred to as
the "City", and the undersigned Developer, hereinafter referred to as the
"Developer', of High Point Addition, hereinafter referred to as the "Addition" to the
City of Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas, for the installation of certain community
facilities located therein, and to provide city services thereto. It is understood by
and between the parties that this Agreement is applicable to the 22 lots
contained within the Addition and to the off -site improvements necessary to
support the Addition.
GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
A. It is agreed and understood by the parties hereto that the
Developer shall employ a civil engineer licensed to practice in the
State of Texas for the design and preparation of the plans and
specifications for the construction of all facilities covered by this
Agreement.
B. Since the Developer is prepared to develop the Addition as rapidly
as possible and is desirous of selling lots to builders and having
residential building activity begin as quickly as possible and the City
is desirous of having the Addition completed as rapidly as possible,
the City agrees to release 10% of the lots, after installation of the
water and sewer mains. Framing shall not commence until water
quality is approved by the City and all appropriate Fire Code
requirements are satisfied, and street signs with street names are
in place. Temporary all-weather metal signs securely fastened in
the ground are acceptable until permanent street signs are
installed. The Developer recognizes that the remaining building
permits or Certificates of Occupancy for residential dwellings will
not be issued until the supporting public works infrastructure
including permanent street signs with block numbers and regulatory
signs within the Addition have been accepted by the City. This will
serve as an incentive to the Developer to see that all remaining
items are completed.
Residential Developer Agreement
1
'55-a
C. The Developer will present to the City either a cash escrow, Letters
of Credit, performance bond or payment bond acceptable to the
City guaranteeing and agreeing to pay an amount equal to 100% of
the value of the construction cost of all of the facilities to be
constructed by the Developer, and providing for payment to the City
of such amounts, up to the total remaining amounts required for the
completion of the Addition if the Developer fails to complete the
work within two (2) years of the signing of this Agreement between
the City and Developer. All bonds shall be issued by a Best -rated
bonding company. All Letters of Credit must meet the
Requirements for Irrevocable Letter of Credit attached hereto and
incorporated herein.
The value of the performance bond, Letters of Credit or cash
escrow will reduce at a rate consistent with the amount of work that
has been completed by the Developer and accepted by the City.
Each request for reduction or payment of escrow funds must be
accompanied by lien release(s) executed by all subcontractors
and/or suppliers prior to the release of escrow funds or reduction in
value of the account. Performance and payment bond, Letters of
Credit or cash escrow from the prime contractor(s) or other entity
reasonably acceptable to the City, hereinafter referred to as
Contractor, will be acceptable in lieu of Developer's obligations
specified above.
D. The Developer agrees to furnish to the City maintenance bonds,
letters of credit or cash escrow amounting to 20% of the cost of
construction of underground utilities and 50% of the construction
cost for paving. These maintenance bonds, letters of credit or cash
escrow will be for a period of two (2) years and will be issued prior
to the final City acceptance of the Addition. The maintenance
bonds, letters of credit or cash escrow will be supplied to the City
by the contractors performing the work, and the City will be named
as the beneficiary if the contractors fail to perform any required
maintenance.
If the Developer chooses to construct bar ditches in lieu of curb and
gutter, and the City approved the design and grade of bar ditches,
Developer understands and agrees to provide maintenance on the
bar ditches for a period of two years from the date of acceptance of
the Addition. Maintenance includes trash and debris cleanup,
mowing, and erosion control.
Residential Developer Agreement
2
6 S-3
E. Until the performance and payment bonds, Letters of Credit or cash
escrow required in Paragraph C have been furnished as required,
no approval of work on or in the Addition shall be given by City and
no work shall be initiated on or in said Addition by Developer, save
and except as provided above.
F. It is further agreed and understood by the parties hereto that upon
acceptance by the City, title to all facilities and improvements
mentioned hereinabove shall be vested in the City and Developer
hereby relinquishes any right, title or interest in and to said facilities
or any part thereof. It is further understood and agreed that until
the City accepts such improvements, the City shall have no liability
or responsibility in connection with any such facilities. Acceptance
of the facilities shall occur at such time that the City, through its City
Manager or his duly authorized representative, provides Developer
with a written acknowledgement that all facilities are complete,
have been inspected and approved and are being accepted by the
City.
G. On all public facilities included in this Agreement for which
Developer awards his own construction contract, Developer agrees
to the following procedure:
Developer agrees to pay the following:
a. Inspection fees equal to three percent (3%) of the
cost of the water, street, drainage and sanitary sewer
facilities, on all facilities included in this Agreement for
which Developer awards his or her own construction
contract, to be paid prior to construction of each
phase and based on actual bid construction cost;
b. Administrative Processing fee equal to, two percent
(2%) of the cost of water, street, drainage and
sanitary sewer facilities, on all facilities included in this
Agreement for which Developer awards his or her
own construction contract, to be paid prior to
construction of each phase and based on actual bid
construction cost;
C. Trench testing (95% Standard);
d. The additional charge for inspections during Saturday,
Sunday, holidays, and after normal working hours;
e. Any charges for re -testing as a result of failed tests;
Residential Developer Agreement
3
All gradation tests required to insure proper cement
and/or lime stabilization.
2. The City agrees to bear the expense of:
a. All nuclear density tests on the roadway subgrade
(95% Standard);
b. Technicians time for preparing concrete cylinders;
and
C. Concrete cylinder tests and concrete coring samples.
The City can delay connection of buildings to service lines or
water mains constructed under this Agreement until said
water mains and service lines have been completed to the
satisfaction of and acceptance by the City.
H. The Developer and any third party, independent entity engaged in
the construction of houses, hereinafter referred to as "Builder" will
be responsible for mowing all grass and weeds and otherwise
reasonably maintaining the aesthetics of all land and lots in said
Addition which have not been sold to third parties. After fifteen (15)
days written notice, should the Developer or Builder fail in this
responsibility, the City may contract for this service and bill the
Developer or Builder for reasonable costs. Should such cost
remain unpaid for 120 days after notice, the City can file a lien on
such property so maintained.
I. Any guarantee of payment instrument (Performance Bond, Letter of
Credit, etc.) submitted by the Developer or Contractor on a form
other than the one which has been previously approved by the City
as "acceptable" shall be submitted to the City Attorney and this
Agreement shall not be considered in effect until such City Attorney
has approved the instrument. Approval by the City shall not be
unreasonably withheld or delayed.
J. Any surety company through which a bond is written shall be a
surety company duly authorized to do business in the State of
Texas, provided that the City, through the City Manager, shall retain
the right to reject any surety company as a surety for any work
under this or any other Developer's Agreement within the City
regardless of such company's authorization to do business in
Texas. Approval by the City shall not be unreasonably withheld or
delayed.
Residential Developer Agreement
4
15:Y-5
II. FACILITIES
A. ON SITE WATER
The Developer hereby agrees to install water facilities to service
lots as shown on the final plat of the Addition. Water facilities will
be installed in accordance with plans and specifications to be
prepared by the Developer's engineer and released by the City.
Further, the Developer agrees to complete this installation in
accordance with Ordinance No. 170 and shall be responsible for all
construction costs, materials and engineering. In the event that
certain water lines are to be oversized because of City
requirements, the City will reimburse the Developer for the oversize
cost greater than the cost of an 8" line. Additionally, the City
agrees to provide temporary water service at Developer's request
and expense, for construction, testing and irrigation purposes only,
to individual lots during the construction of homes, even though
sanitary sewer service may not be available to the homes.
B. DRAINAGE
Developer hereby agrees to construct the necessary drainage
facilities within the Addition. These facilities shall be in accordance
with the plans and specifications to be prepared by Developer's
engineers, released by the Director of Public Works, and made part
of the final plat as approved by the Planning and Zoning
Commission. The Developer hereby agrees to fully comply with all
EPA requirements relating to the planning, permitting and
management of storm water which may be in force at the time that
development proposals are being presented for approval by the
City. The Developer hereby agrees to comply with all provisions of
the Texas Water Code.
C. LAW COMPLIANCE
Developer hereby agrees to comply with all federal, state, and local
laws that are applicable to development of this Addition.
Residential Developer Agreement
5
D. STREETS
1. The street construction in the Addition shall conform to the
requirements in accordance with plans and specifications to
be prepared by the Developer's engineer and released by
the Director of Public Works. Streets will be installed in
accordance with the plans and specifications to be prepared
by the Developer's engineer and released by the Director of
Public Works.
2. The Developer will be responsible for:
a. Installation and two year operation cost of street
lights, which is payable to the City prior to final
acceptance of the Addition; or an agreement with
utility provider stating that no charge will be made for
street lights for the two-year duration.
b. Installation of all street signs designating the names
of the streets inside the Addition, said signs to be of a
type, size, color and design standard generally
employed by the Developer and approved by the City
in accordance with City ordinances.
C. Installation of all regulatory signs recommended
based upon the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control
Devices as prepared by the Developer's engineer by
an engineering study or direction by the Director of
Public Works. It is understood that Developer may
put in signage having unique architectural features,
however, should the signs be moved or destroyed by
any means the City is only responsible for
replacement of standard signage.
3. All street improvements will be subject to inspection and
approval by the City. No work will begin on any street
included herein prior to complying with the requirements
contained elsewhere in this Agreement. All water, sanitary
sewer, and storm drainage utilities which are anticipated to
be installed within the street or within the street right-of-way
will be completed prior to the commencement of street
construction on the specific section of street in which the
utility improvements have been placed or for which they are
programmed. It is understood by and between the
Developer and the City that this requirement is aimed at
Residential Developer Agreement
6
53___1
substantial compliance with the majority of the pre -planned
facilities.
It is understood that in every construction project a decision
later may be made to realign a line or service which may
occur after construction has commenced. The Developer
hereby agrees to advise the City Director of Public Works as
quickly as possible when such a need has been identified
and to work cooperatively with the City to make such utility
change in a manner that will be least disruptive to street
construction or stability.
E. ON SITE SANITARY SEWER FACILITIES
The Developer hereby agrees . to install sanitary sewerage
collection facilities to service lots as shown on the final plat of the
Addition. Sanitary sewer facilities will be installed in accordance
with the plans and specifications to be prepared by the Developer's
engineer and released by the City. Further, the Developer agrees
to complete this installation in compliance with all applicable city
ordinances, regulations and codes and shall be responsible for all
construction costs, materials and engineering. In the event that
certain sewer lines are to be oversized because of City
requirements, the City will reimburse the Developer for the oversize
cost greater than the cost of an 8" line.
F. EROSION CONTROL
During construction of the Addition and after the streets have been
installed, the Developer agrees to keep the streets free from soil
build-up. The Developer agrees to use soil control measures such
as hay bales, silt screening, hydromulch, etc., to prevent soil
erosion. It will be the Developer's responsibility to present to the
Director of Public Works a soil control development plan that will be
implemented for this Addition. When in the opinion of the Director
of Public Works there is sufficient soil build-up on the streets or
other drainage areas and notification has been given to the
Developer, the Developer will have seventy-two (72) hours to clear
the soil from the streets or affected areas. If the Developer does
not remove the soil from the street within 72 hours, the City may
cause the soil to be removed either by contract or City forces and
place the soil within the Addition at the Developer's expense. All
expenses must by paid to the City prior to acceptance of the
Addition.
Residential Developer Agreement
7
6 �S'- S
G. AMENITIES
It is understood by and between the City p and Developer that the
Addition may incorporate a number of unique amenities and
aesthetic improvements such as ponds, aesthetic lakes, unique
landscaping, walls and may incorporate specialty signage and
accessory facilities. The Developer agrees to accept responsibility
for the construction and maintenance of all such aesthetic or
specialty item such as walls, vegetation, signage, landscaping,
street furniture, pond and lake improvements until such
responsibility is turned over to a homeowners association.
H. USE OF PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY
It is understood by and between the City and Developer that the
Developer may provide unique amenities within public right-of-way,
such as landscaping, irrigation, lighting, etc., for the enhancement
of the Addition. The Developer agrees to maintain these amenities
until such responsibility is turned over to a homeowners
association. The Developer and his successors and assigns
understand that the City shall not be responsible for the
replacement of these amenities under any circumstances and
further agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the City from any
and all damages, loss or liability of any kind whatsoever by reason
of injury to property or third person occasioned by its use of the
public right-of-way with regard to these improvements and the
Developer shall, at his own cost and expense, defend and protect
the City against all such claims and demands.
I. START OF CONSTRUCTION
Before the construction of the streets, and the water, sewer, or
drainage facilities can begin, the following must take place:
Approved payment and performance bonds must be
submitted to the City in the name of the City prior to the
commencement of any work.
2. At least six (6) sets of construction plans to be stamped
"Released for Construction" by the Director of Public Works
must be submitted.
3. All fees required to be paid to the City.
4. Developer Agreement must be executed.
Residential Developer Agreement
8
5S 9
5. The Developer, or Contractor, shall furnis
h
6. A pre -construction meeting between Developer and City is
required. Developer or contractor shall furnish to the City a
list of all subcontractors and suppliers, which will be
providing greater than a $1,000 value to the Addition.
III. GENERAL PROVISIONS
A. INDEMNIFICATION
DEVELOPER COVENANTS AND AGREES TO INDEMNIFY AND
DOES HEREBY INDEMNIFY, HOLD HARMLESS AND DEFEND
CITY, ITS OFFICERS, AGENTS, SERVANTS AND EMPLOYEES,
FROM AND AGAINST ANY AND ALL CLAIMS OR SUITS FOR
PROPERTY DAMAGE OR LOSS AND/OR PERSONAL INJURY,
INCLUDING DEATH, TO ANY AND ALL PERSONS OF
WHATSOEVER KIND OR CHARACTER, WHETHER REAL OR
ASSERTED, (INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION,
REASONABLE FEES AND EXPENSES OF ATTORNEYS,
EXPERT WITNESSES AND OTHER CONSULTANTS), ARISING
OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH, DIRECTLY OR
INDIRECTLY, THE CONSTRUCTION, MAINTENANCE,
OCCUPANCY, USE, EXISTENCE OR LOCATION OF SAID
IMPROVEMENT OR IMPROVEMENTS, AND SHALL FURTHER
BE LIABLE FOR INJURY OR DAMAGE TO CITY PROPERTY,
ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH ANY AND ALL
ACTS OR OMISSIONS OF DEVELOPER, ITS OFFICERS,
AGENTS, SERVANTS, EMPLOYEES, CONTRACTORS,
SUBCONTRACTORS, LICENSEES, OR INVITEES, SAID
INDEMNIFICATION TO REMAIN IN EFFECT UNTIL THE CITY
ACCEPTS THE ADDITION.
DEVELOPER AGREES TO INDEMNIFY THE CITY, ITS
OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES FOR ANY DAMAGES, CLAIMS
OR LIABILITIES ARISING FROM THE NEGLIGENT ACT OR
OMISSION, OR OF THE CONCURRENT NEGLIGENT ACT OR
OMISSION, OF THE CITY, ITS OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES.
B. Venue of any action brought hereunder shall be in Fort Worth,
Tarrant County, Texas.
Residential Developer Agreement
9
5S-I0
C. Approval by the Director of Public Works or other City employee of
any plans, designs or specifications submitted by the Developer
pursuant to this Agreement shall not constitute or be deemed to be
a release of the responsibility and liability of the Developer, his
engineer, employees, officers or agents for the accuracy and
competency of their design and specifications. Such approval shall
not be deemed to be an assumption of such responsibility and
liability by the City for any defect in the design and specifications
prepared by the consulting engineer, his officers, agents, servants
or employees, it being the intent of the parties that approval by the
Director of Public Works signifies the City's approval on only the
general design concept of the improvements to be constructed. In
this connection, the Developer shall for a period of two (2) years
after the acceptance by the City of the completed construction
project, indemnify and hold harmless the City, its officers, agents,
servants and employees, from any loss, damage, liability or
expense on account of damage to property and injuries, including
death, to any and all persons which may arise out of any defect,
deficiency or negligence of the engineer's designs and
specifications incorporated into any improvements constructed in
accordance therewith, and the Developer shall defend at his own
expense any suits or other proceedings brought against the City, its
officers, agents, servants or employees, or any of them, on account
thereof, to pay all expenses and satisfy all judgement which may be
incurred by or rendered against them or any of them in connection
herewith.
D. This Agreement or any part herein, or any interest herein, shall not
be assigned by the Developer without the express written consent
of the City Manager, which shall not be unreasonably withheld or
delayed.
E. On all facilities included in this Agreement for which the Developer
awards his own construction contract, the Developer agrees to
employ a construction contractor who is approved by the City, and
whose approval shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed, said
contractor to meet City and statutory requirements for being
insured, licensed and bonded to do work in public streets and to be
qualified in all respects to bid on public streets and to be qualified in
all respects to bid on public projects of a similar nature.
Residential Developer Agreement
10
S-5"- 11
F. Work performed under the Agreement shall be completed within
two (2) years from the date thereof. In the event the work is not
�W completed within the two (2) year period, the City may, at its
election, draw on the performance bond, Letter of Credit, or other
security provided by Developer and complete such work at
Developer's expense, provided however, that if the construction
under this Agreement shall have started within the two (2) year
period, the City may agree to renew the Agreement with such
renewed Agreement to be in compliance with the City policies in
effect at that time.
G. The City is an exempt organization under Section 151.309, Tax
Code, and the facilities constructed under this Agreement will be
dedicated to public use and accepted by the City upon
acknowledgement by the City of completion under Paragraph U.
1. The purchase of tangible personal property, other than
machinery or equipment and its accessories, repair, and
replacement parts, for use in the performance of this
Agreement is, therefore, exempt from taxation under
Chapter 151, Tax Code, if the tangible property is:
a. necessary and essential for the performance of the
Agreement; and
b. completely consumed at the job site.
2. The purchase of a taxable service for use in the performance
of this Agreement is exempt if the service is performed at the
job site and if:
a. this Agreement expressly requires the specific service
to be provided or purchased by the person performing
the Agreement; or
b. the service is integral to the performance of the
Agreement.
H. Prior to final acceptance of the Addition, the Developer shall
provide to the City three (3) copies of Record Drawings of the
Addition, showing the facilities as actually constructed.
Residential Developer Agreement
11
6S 12
I. Such drawings will be stamped and signed by a registered
professional civil engineer. In addition, the Developer shall provide
electronic files showing the plan and profile of the sanitary sewer,
storm drain, roadway and waterline; all lot lines, and tie in to the
state Plane Coordinate System.
IV. OTHER ISSUES
A. OFF -SITE DRAINAGE
B. OFF -SITE WATER
C. PARK FEES
The Developer agrees to pay the Park Fee of $1,500 per lot, in
accordance with the Subdivision Ordinance No. 483-F, Section 7.0.
There are 22 lots in the Addition, which would bring the total cost of
Park Fee to $33,000.
D. TREE PRESERVATION ORDINANCE
All construction activities shall meet the requirements of the Tree
Preservation Ordinance No. 585-A.
SIGNED AND EFFECTIVE on the date last set forth below.
DEVELOPER:
By: Kosse Maykus
Title: President, K.M. Properties Inc.
Address: P.O. Box 92747, Southlake, Texas 76092
Residential Developer Agreement
12
STATE OF
COUNTY OF
On , before me,
Notary Public, personally appeared
personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to
be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and
acknowledged to me that he executed the same in his authorized capacity, and
that by his signature on the instrument, the person, or the entity upon behalf of
which the person acted, executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Notary Public
My commission expires:
CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS
Rick Stacy, Mayor
ATTEST:
Sandra LeGrand, City Secretary
Date:
Residential Developer Agreement
13
5V-'4
(SEAL)
REQUIREMENTS FOR IRREVOCABLE LETTER OF CREDIT
1. The Letter of Credit must have a duration of at least one year.
2. The Letter of Credit may be substituted for utility security deposits
exceeding $10,000.00. The City reserves the right to specify the face
amount of the Letter of Credit.
3. The Letter of Credit must be issued by a FDIC insured bank in a form
acceptable to the City of Southlake. The City reserves the right to
approve/disapprove the bank issuing the Letter of Credit.
4. The Letter of Credit must be issued by a bank that has a minimum capital
ratio of six percent (6%), and has been profitable for each of the last two
consecutive years.
5. The customer must provide the City with supporting financial information
on the bank to allow the City to ascertain requirements are met. Suitable
financial information would be the previous two (2) years December 31
Call Reports submitted to the FDIC and audited financial statements.
6. Partial drawings against Letter of Credit must be permitted.
7. The City must be able to draft on sight with proof of amount owed.
8. The customer pays any and all fees associated with obtaining Letter of
Credit.
9. Expiring Letter of Credit must be replaced by substitute Letters of Credit at
least 30 days prior to the expiration date on the Letter of Credit held by the
City.
Residential Developer Agreement
14
55-15
In
Y.Yur�
:•LYSe��
CCtiY_•_'.
r
ee
s�x
d'
cr
f,
t� E
jjE a
r�N
o
a o
a]
V. 7V4 P. 7r5 :V.4 P 79V. 4547. P. 7r= V 481, p SW. .■7S�
1wga€a 9
888888
i r ;
�-��--
;r tF i[ta
( [FrI .I r
ii{P �• ;
t
tF
i it r
fr? `
IN
Lq
City of Southlake
• ' Department of PlanninLy
STAFF REPORT
April 27, 2001
CASE NO: ZA01-016
PROJECT: Timarron Golf Course
REQUEST: On behalf of Westerra Timarron, LP, Carter & Burgess, Inc. is requesting approval
of a revised development plan.
ACTION NEEDED: 1. Conduct public hearing
2. Consider development plan request.
ATTACHMENTS: (A) Background Information
(B) Vicinity Map
(C) Plans and Support Information
(D) Site Plan Review Summary
(E) Surrounding Property Owner Map
(F) Surrounding Property Owner's Responses
(G) Full Size Plans (for Commission and Council11embers Only)
STAFF CONTACT: Dennis Killough, 481-2073
Ben Bryner, 481-2086
Case No.
ZA01-016
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
OWNER: Westerra Timarron, LP
APPLICANT: Carter & Burgess, Inc.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this Development Plan is to change the current regulations
for development from "Commercial" to "Residential".
PROPERTY SITUATION: The property is located on the south side of Byron Nelson Parkway,
approximately 400' east of Fairwood Court.
HISTORY: Activities on this property include:
• In October 1989 the property was rezoned from AG/SF 1-A to R-PUD.
• In April 1995 a Development Plan was approved by City Council.
• In June of 1995 a Preliminary Plat was approved by City Council.
• In October 1997 a Revised Preliminary Plat was approved by City
Council.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
LAND USE CATEGORY
CURRENT ZONING:
TRANSPORTATION
ASSESSMENT:
WATER & SEWER:
Case No.
ZA01-016
Lots 3R1 and 3R2, Timarron Golf Course Addition
Medium Density Residential
"R-PUD" Residential Planned Unit Development
Existinz Area Road Network and Conditions
Byron Nelson Parkway is a local street with 60' of right-of-way. A future
residential street (Clubhouse Drive) with 50' of right-of-way has been
proposed with the platting for Clubhouse Estates phase 1. One lot will have
access onto Byron Nelson Parkway with the remaining three lots having
access onto Clubhouse Drive.
Traffic Impact
Use #Units
Vtpd*
AM-
AM-
PM-
PM-
IN
OUT
IN
OUT
Residential Lots 4
38
1
2
3
1
*Vehicle Trips Per Day
*The AM/PM times represent the number of vehicle trips generated during
the peak travel times on Byron Nelson Parkway
There is an 8" water and an 8" sewer line located on Byron Nelson Parkway.
Attachment A
Page 1
ESTIMATED IMPACT
FEES*:
Water $7,434.56 assumes 4 — 1" simple meters
Wastewater $4,632.96 assumes 4 — 1" simple meters
Roadway $5,982.68 assumes 4 single family residences
rivai Impact rees are aetermmea oy the tsunamg Services Department at the time of building
permit issuance. The fees shown above only represent estimates prepared by the Planning Department.
P&Z ACTION: April 19, 2001; Approved (6-0) subject to Development Plan Review
Summary No. 3, dated April 12, 2001, explicitly approving Development
Regulations as shown in the packet.
P&Z SPEAKERS: None
STAFF COMMENTS: Attached is Development Review Summary No. 3, dated April 12, 2001.
The staff review provides a comparison between the proposed regulations for
this development and the closest related zoning district of the City's Zoning
Ordinance, "SF-20A" zoning district regulations of Ordinance 480.
The regulations proposed for this development are similar to those for the
phase to the east.
NACommunity Development\WP-FILES\ME�10\2001cases\01-016DP.doc
Case No.
ZA01-016
Attachment A
Page 2
Vicinity Map
Lots 3R1 and 3R2, Timarron Golf Course Addition
1000 0 1000 2000 3000 Feet
NT
10
Case No. Attachment B
ZA01-016 Page 1
I
L
3
i"
Case No. Attachment C
ZA01-016 Page 1
IN
Case No.
ZA01-016
TIMARRON
DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS
CLUBHOUSE ESTATES PHASE 2
S:t:res,
lac 77-cre than 5G1'_ _.. s !G,S NIi!
3`/e front yams less ' ,an thi y-
-..e .eet 1!35',
ar..
;,env0', _ei minimun
'ar;
- ;e Feet ", minimum cn no
than 25' 1 of lcts and ten
Feet "C mini.-nlurr'. or -ernairir+r.
jots ,No house may be
..,.,ser than C.vervl feet i'20"! *c
diacent house.
dt or S ce r arc
acent ',3 3!reet:
, -;en,, ` 0 feet minimum
c;i.
- -�-.•'/e J foot .,rr'ili..:rn ct
,,�r.ctn on tt 0 the ;cis: 10% of :re
_'S -~ay 'lave Ct INidt"?S at the from
=_,cac& lire trat �,ar/ f cm £ftv fee;
J1 'o ejgrv,/-F,, e feet ..-
__.
'i'1e ,vrcrC_
.rac-
Attachment C
Page 2
DEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW SUMMARY
Case No.: ZA01-016 Review No.: Three
Project Name: Development Plan — Timarron Golf Course
APPLICANT: Carter & Burgess, Inc.
Kacy Flemmons
7950 Elmbrook Dr.
Dallas, TX 75247
Phone: 214/1638-0145
Fax: 214/638-0447
Date of Review: 04/12/01
OWNER: Westerra Timarron, LP
Miles Prestemon
6900 W. Virginia Pkwy
McKinney, TX 75070
Phone: 972/529-5988
Fax:
CITY STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE ABOVE REFERENCED PROJECT RECEIVED BY THE CITY ON
4/02/01 AND WE OFFER THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS. THESE STIPULATIONS ARE HEREBY
MADE CONDITIONS OF SITE PLAN APPROVAL UNLESS SPECIFICALLY AMENDED BY THE
CITY COUNCIL. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR NEED FURTHER CLARIFICATION, PLEASE
CONTACT BEN BRYNER AT (817) 481-2086.
DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS
1. The proposed development regulations for Clubhouse Estates Phase 2 differ from "SF-20" regulations
on the following:
a. Front Yard — Allow a 25' minimum where no more than 50% of the lots will have front yards
less than 35'. "SF-20" regulations require minimum 35' front yards.
b. Rear Yard — 20' minimum. "SF-20" requires a minimum of 40'.
C. Side Yard — Allow five feet (5') minimum on no more than 25% of lots and ten feet (10')
minimum on remaining 75% of lots. No house may be closer than twenty feet (20') to
adjacent house. "SF-20" regulations require 15' side yards.
d. Side Yard Adjacent to Street — Allow a 20' minimum. The Subdivision Ordinance requires
front setback on both streets. "SF-20" regulations require a minimum 35' front yard on all
street frontages.
e. Lot Dimensions —Eighty-five (85') foot minimum lot width on 90% of the lots; 10% of the lots
may have lot widths at the front setback line that vary from fifty feet (50') to eighty-five (85').
The lot depth required is 150'. "SF-20" regulations require a width of 100' and a depth of
125'.
f. Lot Area—15,500 S.F. average with the minimum lot size being 15,000 S.F. "SF-20" requires
minimum 20,000 S.F.
g. Nlinimum Floor Area — Minimum 2,600 S.F. while "SF-20A" has a minimum 1,800 S.F.
Case No. Attachment D
ZA 01-016 Page 1
Surrounding Property Owners
Timarron Golf Course
Property Owner
Zoning
Land Use Description
Acreage
1. Timarron Owners Assoc.
1. R-PUD
1. Medium Density Residential
1.
5.70
2. Timarron Golf Club
2. R-PUD
2. Medium Density Residential
2.
3.43
3. D. Thomas
3. R-PUD
3. Medium Density Residential
3.
0.35
4. G. Kovalic
4. R-PUD
4. Medium Density Residential
4.
0.36
5. D. Stewart
5. R-PUD
5. Medium Density Residential
5.
0.51
6. B. Flowers
6. R-PUD
6. Medium Density Residential
6.
0.49
7. J. Young
7. R-PUD
7. Medium Density Residential
7.
0.35
8. Westerra Timarron
8. R-PUD
8. Medium Density Residential
8.
0.38
9. Westerra Timarron
9. R-PUD
9. Medium Density Residential
9.
1.59
10. Westerra Timarron
10. R-PUD
10. Medium Density Residential
10.
1.37
11. Timarron Golf Club
11. R-PUD
11. Medium Density Residential
11.
66.13
12. R. Allen
12. R-PUD
12. Medium Density Residential
12.
0.90
Case No. Attachment E
ZA 01-016 Page 1
Surrounding Property Owner Responses
Lots 3R1 & 3R2, Timarron Golf Course Addition
NOTICES SENT: Nine (9)
RESPONSES: One (1) response was received from within the 200' notification area:
• Miles Prestemon (Westerra Timarron), 6900 W. Virginia Parkway, McKinney, TX,
in favor. (Received April 18, 2001)
Case No. Attachment F
ZA 01-016 Page 1
City of Southlake
Department of Planning
STAFF REPORT
April 27, 2001
CASE NO: ZA00-124
PROJECT: Gateway Church
REQUEST: On behalf of Southlake Land, Ltd., HKS, Inc is requesting rezoning and site plan
approval.
ACTION NEEDED: 1. Conduct public hearing
2. Consider rezoning and site plan request.
ATTACHMENTS: (A)
Background Information
(B)
Vicinity Map
(C)
Plans and Support Information
(D)
Site Plan Review Summary
(E)
Articulation Review Summary
(F)
Developer Comments
(G)
Surrounding Property Owner Map
(H)
Surrounding Property Owner's Responses
(I)
Ordinance No. 480-362
(J)
Full Size Plans (for Commission and Council Members Only)
STAFF CONTACT: Ben Bryner, 481-2086
Case No.
ZA00-124
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
OWNER: Southlake Land, Ltd.
APPLICANT: HKS, Ltd.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this request is to place "Community Service" district uses
and regulations on the property for development of a church and to fulfill
the site plan approval requirements of the "Corridor Overlay Regulations"
in order to receive a building permit for construction.
PROPERTY SITUATION: The property is located on the south side of East Southlake Boulevard,
approximately 1,160' west of North Kimball Avenue.
HISTORY: There is no zoning history on this property. The land is currently being used
as a horse stable.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Tract 213, situated in the John Freeman Survey Abstract No. 529, and being
13.675 acres.
LAND USE CATEGORY: Office Commercial
CURRENT ZONING:
REQUESTED ZONING
TRANSPORTATION
ASSESSMENT:
Case No.
ZA00-124
"AG" Agricultural
"CS" Community Service District
Master Thoroughfare Plan
The Master Thoroughfare Plan recommends Southlake Boulevard to have
130' of right-of-way. Adequate right-of-way exists.
Existing Area Road Network and Conditions
E. Southlake Boulevard is a five -lane, undivided thoroughfare with a
continuous, two-way, center left -turn lane. The roadway will ultimately be
widened to a seven -lane roadway.
May, 2000 traffic counts on F.M. 1709 (between Carroll Ave. and
Kimball Ave.: Table #1
24hr
West Bound WB 22,723
East Bound (EB) (19,743
WB
Peak A.M. 1,306 11-12 a.m.
Peak P.M. 2,238 5-6 p.m.
EB
Peak A.M. 1,848 7-8 a.m.
Peak P.M. 1,129 3-4 p.m.
Attachment A
Pagel
Traffic Impact
Use
Sq. Ft.
Vtpd*
AM-
IN
AM-
OUT
PM-
IN
PM -
OUT
Church Phase 1 & 2
64,000
584
42
40
54
36
*Vehicle Trips Per Day
*The AM/PM times represent the number of vehicle trips generated during the peak travel
times on Southlake Boulevard.
Southlake Boulevard carries approximately 42,500 vehicles a day with peak
traffic times occurring between 7 a.m. and 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. and 6 p.m. The
site will generate 82 vehicle trips during the A.M. rush hour and 90 trips
during the P.M. rush hour. It should be noted that most vehicle trips will be
generated during off-peak times. This site on Sunday will generate 1,172
trips that day.
Internal Circulation
The proposed site will have one (1) full access directly on to Southlake
Boulevard (F.M. 1709). This drive is located across from the main drive into
Village Center. The two drives, however, do not line up. Staff recommends
that the proposed drive for this site be shifted to the west to line up with the
opposing drive to reduce turning movement conflicts.
The proposed site will also have one access directly onto S. Village Center
Drive with development of Phase 2. Access will also be available through
a common access easement from the lot west of the property.
Master Trail Plan
No trail is required on the South side of FM 1709 under the current Master
Trails Plan. An 8' paved, multi -use trail is required on the South side of FM
1709 on the new proposed Master Trail Plan.
WATER & SEWER: There is an existing 12" water line and 8" sewer line located on FM 1709.
ESTIMATED IMPACT
FEES*:
Water
$7,806.29
Assumes 2"-simple meter, & 1"-irrigation)_
Wastewater
$3,706.37
Assumes 2"-simple meter
Roadway
$1,190.40
Assumes Church use
• Final Impact Fees are determined by the Building Services Department at the time of building
permit issuance. The fees shown above only represent estimates prepared by the Planning
Department.
P&Z ACTION: April 19, 2001; Approved (6-0) subject to Concept Plan Review Summary
No. 4, dated April 12, 2001, and to accept the requested variances for Item
#1, articulation; Item #2a, private turn -around; Item #2b, stacking; and Item
Case No. Attachment A
ZA00-124 Page2
#2c, driveway spacing.
P&Z SPEAKERS: This information will be forwarded to Council before the meeting.
STAFF COMMENTS: Attached is SITE PLAN Review Summary No. 4, dated April 13, 2001. The
following variances need council action:
• Horizontal articulation on the North and East fagades.
• Dead-end street with turn -around easement, rather than a publicly
dedicated cul-de-sac right-of-way.
• Driveway stacking depth (150' required)
(a) The stacking measured on the drive off FM 1709 is 140'.
(b) The stacking measured from S. Village Center Drive is 42'.
• Driveway spacing on F.M. 1709. Full access drives must be spaced 500'
on FM 1709. The proposed drive will be approximately 250' from the
next full access drive to the east.
• Staff recommendation that the "F.M. 1709" driveway be aligned with the
"Village Center driveway" located on the north side of F.M. 1709.
NACommunity Development\WP-FILES\MEMO\2000cases\00- I 24ZCP.doc
Case No. Attachment A
ZA00-124 Page3
Vicinity Map
Gateway Church
1000 0 1000 2000 3000 Feet
W
N
S
E
Case No. Attachment B
ZA00-124 Page 1
IN
DR
(riji 1'L-
e! a
isCD
! • A a �'
4AL.3a
-
` 1 4
Fhb L ,010t OR'W'cm sl
— T1 �--��---
`1rL"''"''s '7 ��--"I`r- ---(TT#�N'Tf ''�I..r �s,---c- --
�,W
va Tl' I 1 'I r +�
1r- as `--- .�} 4•� ;§_� • a� o= g � \
ke_..�
e II
-i n a (+1 c r
k
-----------------------
a
,zt V M .00. Ia N
�'p�
is
°8e1 :all qq@ sa , F !
4AA :gga°A adMfg ee
ae��3s•a�� fin, �g��g�g�q �Q$��
11, 9gqeg�Bry;°5q:o.3��a's.a.g
Y �SA�iX�kld a5'a%ie8@$@�y6�9@�p=
Case No. Attachment C
ZA00-124 Page 1
'
OR E
L-_ --- �_— —' �.
�.__-:._: _� �� -_�� L 1�c�
wrr'�ej �
Case No.
ZA00-124
c�
0
:a
-
v
5
fI
t
I luw tl�l':�I
47 ®IN II'l- P!II
6¢'P711 dv 1 7
�--CC
I
bi.
.lBSECIWIo
a m7n:n=m3 i
ral
—uu7a4�osuEl
A raI
n
Attachment C
Page 2
SITE PLAN REVIEW SUMMARY
Case No.: ZA00-124 Review No.: Four Date of Review: 04/12/O1
Project Name: Site Plan — Gateway Church
APPLICANT: Gateway Church
George Grubbs
P.O. Box 100
ENGINEER: Adams Engineering
Rob Adams
2445 E. Southlake Blvd. Suite #100
Southlake, TX 76092 Southlake, Texas 76092
Phone: (817) 329-4622 (817) 307-1080 Phone: (817) 329-6990
Fax: (817) 251-4900 Fax: (817) 329-7671
CITY STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE ABOVE REFERENCED PROTECT RECEIVED BY THE CITY ON
4/09/01 AND WE OFFER THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS. THESE STIPULATIONS ARE HEREBY
MADE CONDITIONS OF CONCEPT PLAN APPROVAL UNLESS SPECIFICALLY AMENDED BY THE
CITY COUNCIL. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR NEED FURTHER CLARIFICATION, PLEASE
CONTACT DENNIS KILLOUGH AT (817) 481-2073 OR BEN BRYNER AT (817) 481-2086.
Provide horizontal and vertical articulation meeting the requirements of Ord. 480, Section
43.9.c. Lc on all facades visible from a Corridor R.O.W. The front (east) and right (north) sides
do not comply with horizontal articulation requirements (See attached articulation chart). (A
variance has been requested.)
2. The following changes are needed in regards to driveways:
a. The Subdivision Ordinance does not permit dead end streets. The applicant proposes a
private turn -around easement in lieu of a public R.O.W. for a cul-de-sac.
b. The stacking depths required for this site is 150'.
(1) The stacking measured from the correct R.O.W. line equals 140'. The applicant
should note that the R.O.W for FM 1709 is 130', not 120' as shown. (A variance
has been requested.)
(2) The stacking measured from S. Village Center Drive to the centerline of the first
drive equals approximately 42'. (A variance has been requested.)
The Driveway Ordinance requires 500' between full access driveways on FM 1709. The
next full access drive to the east is approximately 263' away. (A variance has been
requested.)
Show and label a 15' setback from the south boundary line of Gumm Professional Offices
property.
Case No. Attachment D
ZA 00-124 Page 1
4. Shift the full access drive to the West in order to line up with the drive across FM 1709. Staff
recommends that the two opposing drives should line up to reduce turning movement conflicts.
5. Please correct the following on the site data table:
a. Correct the calculations regarding open space. Provide total area of open space and the
percent of open space compared to the net acreage of the entire property. Interior
landscaping and bufferyards should be included as part of open space.
b. Correct the calculations regarding impervious coverage. This should include the building,
parking, and any cement or paving. Interior landscape and bufferyards are not included.
The maximum impervious coverage shall not exceed sixty-five (65%) percent of the total
lot area in the "CS" zoning district.
Remove the outdoor storage information completely from the table.
Any variance requests have to be documented in writing and fully justified.
The applicant should be aware that prior to issuance of a building permit a Plat must be processed and
filed in the County Plat Records, and a fully corrected site plan, landscape plan, irrigation plan, and
building plans, must be submitted for approval and all required fees must be paid. This may include
but not be limited to the following fees: Park Fee, Roadway Impact Fees, Water & Sewer Impact and
Tap Fees, and related Permit Fees. The preliminary plat is in process.
. * A revised Site Plan is required prior to Phase 2 building construction.
* This review is based on the "CS" Zoning District Regulations.
* It appears that this property lies within the 65 LDN D/FW Regional Airport Overlay Zone and
will require construction standards that meet requirements of the Airport Compatible Land Use
Zoning Ordinance No. 479.
* A Day Care or a Mother's Day Out facility will require approval of a Specific Use Permit.
* Denotes Informational Comment
Case No. Attachment D
ZA 00-124 Page 2
Articulation Evaluation No.2
Case No. ZA 00-124
jDate of Evaluation: 04:/12/01
Elevations for Gateway Church
Received: 04/09/01
Front - facing:
East
Wall ht . =
30
Horizontal articulation
Vertical articulation
Required
Provided
Delta
Okay?
Required
Provided
Delta
Okay?
Max. wall
length
90
44
-51%
Yes
90
45
-50%
Yes
Min. artic.
offset
5
5
0%
Yes
5
5
0%
Yes
Min. artic.
length
18
15
-17%
No
5
6
33%
Yes
Rear - facing
West
Fall ht . =
15
Horizontal articulation
Vertical articulation
Required
Provided
Delta
Okay?
Required
Provided
Delta
Okay?
Max. wall
length
45
44
-2%
Yes
45
44
-2%
Yes
Min. artic.
offset
2
2
0%
Yes
2
6
200%
Yes
Min. artic.
length
11
15
36%
Yes
11
15
36%
Yes
Right - facing:
North
Fall ht . =
30
Horizontal articulation
Vertical articulation
Required
Provided
Delta
Okay?
Required
Provided
Delta
Okay?
Max. wall
len th
90
64
-29%
Yes
90
35
-61%
Yes
Min. artic.
offset
5
5
0%
Yes
5
5
00-.
Yes
Min. artic.
length
23
15
-35%
No
5
6
33%
Yes
Left - facing:
South
lWall ht . =
N/A
Horizontal articulation
lVertical articulation
Required
Provided
Delta
Okay?
Required
Provided
Delta
Okay?
Max. wall
len th
0
#####
Yes
0
#####
Yes
Min. artic.
offset
0
#####
Yes
0
#####
Yes
Min. artic. length
I
1#####lYesl
I
#####
Yes
Case No. Attachment E
ZA 00-124 Page 1
F14/11/2001 04:12 2819707757 PREMIER ARCHITECTS PAGE 02
AX 11",
ADAMS CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC VARIANCE REQUEST
Civil . Environmental Engineers
2445 E. Southlake Blvd., Suite 100
Southlake, Texas 78N2
To Whom It May Concem.
The following is a written request for a variance presented to the City of Southlake Planning Department
This variance request is lot the proposed development known as Gateway Church Said development is requ led to provide
the following.
Horizontal Articulatlon No building facade shall extend gloater then 3 times the wall's height without havil 0a minimum
off -set of 15% of the well's height. and such offset shall continue for a minimum distance equal to at lea 1 25% of the
maximum length of either adjacent plane
The proposed Horizontal Articulation does not meet this requirement on two facades, North and East.
The North and East facades of the building facing Fm 1709 have both been revised to meet the Horizon I Articulation
Ordinance as much as possible. I have outlined the primary reasons for not being able to mast the ordinan at its fullest
extent or definition.
Respectfully,
Nathan Olson
1. I designed the center arch of the 3 arches on each side to have a MHOL of 4'-Q' of a 30' hip
11.
The odjaoant wall length Is 71' and the required MHFL should be 1 T-9' — However: the cola
larch Is
14'-9' wide because I can't adjust the arch width or location to accommodate the floor pi
layout. The
additional 3' of width for horizontal articulation would provide no added function to the A
plan and Its'
intended use.
2 1 intended that the 3 arches would be perceived so a'group* of articulations that would be
riled as one
articulated plane which would meet and exceed the Horizontal Articulation Ordinance.
3 It modified to meet the strict guidelines of the Horizontal Articulation Ordinance the estheti
f the Church
Building would be disproportional and create a less interesting facade-
4 The current design allows for greater articulation shadow lines that will not overlap and will
eats a sense
of greater depth and visual play against the Primary facade.
5. The phase 2 development will also provide a Grand Entry piece that is very similar to the
hose 1 mein
entry. This phase 2 Grand entry will more than exceed the horizontal articulation requlr
ants. Please
refer to site pion for Phase 2 Grand Entry footprint ® union of phase 1 and 2.
REGD � j 1 � 2Q01
SIGNED.
❑ Rob Adams 0 PM Williford O Jimmy Lopez :1 David Recht 0 Nathan Olson Cl Chad
n_.........., r�wc.,_ r. i,.. r_...._ c.......� n�...... r_..h�n ram.... c_.. 'v..� r�...r...r..
Case No. Attachment F
ZA 00-124 Pagel
AX
ADAMS CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC
Civil • Environmental Engineers
2445 E. Southlake Blvd., Suite 100
Southlake, Texas 76092
To Whom It May Concern:
VARIANCE REQUEST
The following is a written request for a variance presented to the City of Southlake Planning Department.
This variance request is for the proposed development known as Gateway Church. Said development is required to provide 150 foot
minimum stacking in its driveways. The proposed development does not meet this requirement in two driveways.
For the purposes of this request, the driveways will be named Drive (A) and Drive (B).
Drive (A) is located in the front parking area and accesses F.M. 1709. Stacking for this drive measures 140 feet.
Drive (B) is located at the end of S. Village Dr. terminating into a proposed cul-de-sac. Stacking for this drive measures 40 feet.
Our justification for the placement of the proposed driveways without providing the required distance for stacking is as
follows:
1) Driveway (A) is 24 feet wide. The amount of stacking will be doubled with this two-lane entry. Also, this entry will only
be used during services offered at off-peak hours.
2) Driveway (B) is located at the end of a public road that only serves the three lots that adjoin it. During services, the
businesses located on S. Village Dr. will be closed and any stacking can be held in this road.
Respectfully,
Nathan Olson
c� u a ZGo,
SIGNED:
--'Rob Adams _ Pat Williford ❑ Jimmy Lopez E. David Recht 0 Nathan Olson ❑ Chad Kimbell
Corporate Office: Tyler, Texas Branch Offices: Garland, Texas • San Diego, California
-Z 00-+zy
Case No. Attachment F
ZA 00-124 Page 2
AX
ADAMS CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC
Civil • Environmental Engineers
2445 E. Southlake Blvd., Suite 100
Southlake, Texas 76092
To Whom It May Concern:
VARIANCE REQUEST
The following is a written request for a variance presented to the City of Southlake Planning Department.
This variance request is for the proposed development known as Gateway Church. Said development requires a full access
driveway intersecting Southlake Blvd. / F.M. 1709. The driveway ordinance states that 500 foot minimum spacing shall be provided
between full access drives on 1709. The distance between the two existing full access drives on F.M. 1709 is less than 1000 feet.
The proposed driveway has been located to provide 618 feet - 9 inches of centerline to centerline distance from the Village
Center driveway. ( meets requirement in driveway ordinance )
The proposed driveway has been located to provide 253 feet - 8 inches of centerline to centerline distance from the driveway
for the business named Dallas Foam. ( does not meet requirement in driveway ordinance )
Our justification for the placement of the proposed driveway without providing the required distance to the Dallas Foam
driveway are as follows:
1) The proposed development will receive its traffic only at the time of church services. These services begin on
Wednesday after office hours and on Sunday. Dallas Foam is closed for business at the time of these services.
2) Dallas Foam is a small business that ships packaging materials and does not receive appreciable traffic compared to a
retail store.
Respectfully,
Nathan Olson
REC'D r ` 0 9 2001
REC'D 2001
SIGNED:
E Rob Adams Pat Williford ❑ Jimmy Lopez L. David Recht a Nathan Olson ❑ Chad Kimbell
Corporate Office: Tyler, Texas Branch Offices: Garland, Texas • San Diego, California
L A00-12-Ll
Case No. Attachment F
ZA 00-124 Page 3
Surrounding Property Owners
Gateway Church
�N n oaf k I
� 3 4
Property Owner
Zoning
Land Use Description
Acreage
1. Chevron
1. C-3
1. Retail Commercial
1.
0.93
2.OTR
2. C-3
2. Retail Commercial
2.
13.08
3. Wendy's
3. C-3
3. Retail Commercial
3.
0.81
4. Walmart
4. C-3
4. Retail Commercial
4.
16.51
5. Dallas Foam
5. B-1
5. Office Commercial
5.
0.91
6. S. Buchanan
6. B-1
6. Office Commercial
6.
1.00
7. Greenway-1709
7. B-1
7. Office Commercial
7.
11.22
8. Carroll ISD
8. CS
8. Public/Semi-Public
8.
12.14
9. C. Dorris
9. SF -IA
9. Low Density Residential
9.
3.63
10. T. Chapman
10. SF -IA
10. Low Density Residential
10.
2.76
11. J. Taylor
11. SF -IA
11. Low Density Residential
11.
1.17
12. M. Heath
12. SF -IA
12. Low Density Residential
12.
1.07
13. L. Raney
13. SF- 1A
13. Low Density Residential
13.
0.98
14. G. Barclay
14. SF -IA
14. Low Density Residential
14.
1.01
15. C. Willan
15.0-1
15. Office Commercial
15.
1.00
16. Southlake Land Ltd
16.0-1
16. Office Commercial
16.
1.41
17. Bedford Pioneer
17. AG
17. Office Commercial
17.
3.61
�w
Case No.
ZA 00-124
IN
Attachment G
Page 1
Surrounding Property Owner Responses
Gateway Church
NOTICES SENT: Seventeen (17)
RESPONSES: Three (3) responses were received from within the 200' notification area:
• Dennis Scifres, 301 Commerce Street #2876, Fort Worth, TX, in favor, "A great
addition to the city." (Received April 9, 2001)
• Tommy Pigg, representing Greenway-1709/Eleven Prts, LP, 2301 Cedar Springs
Road #400, Dallas, TX, opposed (to the site plan, not the zoning.) See attached
letter. (Received April 12, 200 1)
• John G. Taylor, 209 Eastwood Drive, Southlake, TX, opposed. See attached
letter. (Received April 19, 200 1)
One (1) response was received from outside the 200' notification area:
• Sandra J. Lancaster, Sr. Noise Compatibility Planner, DFW International Airport,
opposed. See attached letter. (Received April 19, 2001)
Case No. Attachment H
ZA 00-124 Page 1
ureenway investment raX:114C6UU1250 Hpr iL ui 1 (:vD t'. UL
Greenway Investment Company
Commercial Real Estate Invesrmewss
2301 Cxlar Spngs Road. Suite 400
poll-, TFau 75207 � � 214.880.9009
Pax: 214. gg0.0188
E•Mail: gr=-&y@oor=v.oet
April 12, 2001
City of Southlake
Planning and Zoning Commission
1400 Main Street
Suite 310
Southlake, TX 76092
Reference No: ZA00-124
Dear Chairman and Ladies & Gentlemen of the Commission:
My name is Tommy Pigg, representing Greenway - 1709/Eleven Partners L.P., 'Owner' of the 11
acre property wrapping the 'Dallas Foam' property and adjacent to the subject property for most
of its western boundary.
While not opposed to the church use itself, as an adjacent property owner, we are very concerned
with the drive onto FM 1709 shown as full access. Should this drive limit the full service access
for the remainder of the property between the subject property and Kimball Road, the
development opportttnitics are materially and adversely diminished.
Please consider moving the Church's full service access as far to the west as is possible.
Thank you for you consideration.
Sincerely,
Tommy Pigg \J
Vice President of
the General Partner of Owner
Case No:
ZA 00-124
DFr-n
Attachment H
Page 2
John G. Taylor
Martha T. Taylor
209 Eastwood Dr.
Southlake, TX 76092
(817)416-6680
Planning and Zoning Commission
City of Southlake, Texas
Re: Rezoning and site plan of Gateway Church
Dear Commissioners:
We are delighted and are looking forward to having Gateway Church as our new
community neighbor, but we are opposed to the request for one important reason. The
site plan leaves a corridor of undeveloped land along their west and south property lines
which will allow the city to extend S. Village Dr. as a through street to Kimball Ave.
Gateway Church Officials have stated to us that they are likewise opposed to such a
street extension across their property, and need to be informed that the Mayor and the
City of Southlake still plan for S. Village Dr. to be extended to the new schools, Kimball
Ave., and eventually Snaky Ln.
Extension of S. Village Dr. will have a negative impact on surrounding properties.
S. Village Dr. will become a "shortcut" to Kimball, the two new schools, playing fields,
and the new stadium which will create another serious traffic bottleneck in the right turn
lane off Southlake Blvd. As it is now, the Village Dr. traffic light causes plenty of misery
for residents and office workers trying to exit Westwood Dr. This shortcut will create
unlimited public access to the church and all surrounding properties, fostering additional
security problems and an increase in safety risks for the school children, churchgoers,
office personnel, and adjoining residential properties.
We would like to work with Gateway Church in insuring that the City of
Southlake abandons its plan to extend S. Village Dr. to Kimball Ave.
Sincerely,
pcf,n c E,, i q 2 n n 1
Case No. Attachment H
ZA 00-124 Page 3
Page 1 of 2
04-19-2001 01:OIom From -PUBLIC AFFAIRS NOISE OFFICE 9725748544 T-HO P.004/005 F-644
rT
TJF��✓�
Jeffrey E Fegan Dal a s / Port Forth f niernational A irport
Exo uti- Dovutor
April 19, 2001
Mr. Dennis King
Chairman, Planning & Zoning Commission
City of Southlake
1400 Main Street, Suite 310
Southlake, Texas 76092
RE: Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda of April 19, 2001, Item # 5
Reference No. ZA00-124 Gateway Church
Dear Chairman King:
The Agenda for the City of Southlake Planning and Zoning Commission for April 19, 2001, Item #5,
refers to a proposed rezoning and concept plan for the Gateway Church, a property described as
being located approximately 1,160 feet west of North Kimball Avenue, on the south side of East
Southlake Boulevard. For reasons stated below, the Dallas/Fort Worth Intemational Airport Board
('DFW") is opposed to the proposed use.
Referencing the Airport's Official Noise Contour, the proposed Gateway Church site is located within
the 65 DNL noise level (refer to the attached contour excerpt). The proposed church site lies less
than one half mile from the extended centerline of Runway 13R/31 L and approximately three miles
from the north end of this runway. The property is subject to routine and regular operations by aircraft
operating to and from DFW Intemational Airport. Historical aircraft flight information indicates jets
operate as low as 700 feet above ground level near the subject property.
According to Federal Aviation Administration guidelines and the City of Southlake's own Ordinance
479, 'Airport Compatible Land Use", churches ("Community Service" in the Ordinance) are considered
incompatible unless measures to achieve Noise Level Reduction (NLR) of 35 [per the Ordinance] be
incorporated into design and construction of the structures. Given these factors, approval of the
requested zoning change would violate the 1988 Settlement Agreement between Southlake and the
DFW Airport unless Southlake requires that mandatory building shell noise reduction of 35 dB NLR be
incorporated into the building design, noted on the final building plans, and verified during the building
inspection process in accordance with Ordinance 479.
Thank you for your consideration of this matter. Please contact me at your convenience should you
like to discuss our comments further. [[ nn
SincerelyXr,,J APR 19 ZOO'
'--Sandra J. Lancaster
SR. Noise Compatibility Planner
cc: P. Tomme, K. Robertson, M. Karam
H. Holden, Gateway Church
C:/MP/SoudtlakdGateway ChwcKdoc
ndmim,mwi.c 0M., 3200 E.-I Al711,011 Dn. . Ra, Oi icc D-- NIA2y nrly A;rpon. G— 75261-9:29 . tr72:5;1-HUO
(iilw Case No. Attachment H
ZA 00-124 Page 4
Page 2 of 2
04-19-200) 01:00pm Fram-PUBLIC AFFAIRS NOISE OFFICE 9725748544 T-360 P.003/00 F-644
�"[■�°' �— 9', .• _ - low ..*,
6.
10.
t �'�.[, .ter . = R �r ro � —.� [ ./ :'�•�4 i";t�i, ;.... �a
co i �� , '� .r6•raR, ' `.?
•w....... u!/•9..eh�.',Y+�,cc14�_�"7T'rc"163�'
'L t MYr /.. N[M' .^ '%Ywfi, Nu) [V• .:
eeu.. a tF - � r . --s ♦" .o e 7"��°�tJ c91n 6 �~ �.
V.
pp L •[[w .a IF
ti 1
L� �t J [�:< 5,��� t` , }r"�v I . '•snin-tea•[,✓ •>�•�:iJ .,iISA
i!
1+�,� -e��C•[, +F� � ua, p.c e/ ,r•�••s[i�`'r e"'"t'C:
1.
i!i U T H 4A K E .>,a �... �.� �,>'•�. ` �•. D �s�c _ M u '- g�a
£s ^^7� �E � �e c I��•i.
. ...` /7._. [O.,w,grry. f_:i.'-_ .. '..' ... ev[•t ...t Cbn.•'�7W le!V:� •`b I l ``\:.
If
p a' 7
[.o- =nr E- �'•s....`. .1='i4. i
Case No. Attachment H
ZA 00-124 Page 5
CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS
ORDINANCE NO.480-362
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 480, AS
AMENDED, THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE
OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS; GRANTING A
ZONING CHANGE ON A CERTAIN TRACT OR TRACTS OF
LAND WITHIN THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS BEING
LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS TRACT 2B SITUATED IN THE
JOHN FREEMAN SURVEY, ABSTRACT NO. 529, AND
BEING APPROXIMATELY 13.675 ACRES, AND MORE
FULLY AND COMPLETELY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT "A"
FROM "AG" AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT TO "CS"
COMMUNITY SERVICE DISTRICT AS DEPICTED ON THE
APPROVED SITE PLAN ATTACHED HERETO AND
INCORPORATED HEREIN AS EXHIBIT "B", SUBJECT TO
THE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS CONTAINED IN THIS
ORDINANCE; CORRECTING THE OFFICIAL ZONING
MAP; PRESERVING ALL OTHER PORTIONS OF THE
ZONING ORDINANCE; DETERMINING THAT THE PUBLIC
INTEREST, MORALS AND GENERAL WELFARE DEMAND
THE ZONING CHANGES AND AMENDMENTS HEREIN
MADE; PROVIDING THAT THIS ORDINANCE SHALL BE
CUMULATIVE OF ALL ORDINANCES; PROVIDING A
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY
FOR VIOLATIONS HEREOF; PROVIDING A SAVINGS
CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION IN THE
OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
WHEREAS, the City of Southlake, Texas is a home rule City acting under its Charter
adopted by the electorate pursuant to Article XI, Section 5 of the Texas Constitution and Chapter
9 of the Texas Local Government Code; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 211 of the Local Government Code, the City has the
authority to adopt a comprehensive zoning ordinance and map regulating the location and use of
buildings, other structures and land for business, industrial, residential and other purposes, and to
amend said ordinance and map for the purpose of promoting the public health, safety, morals and
general welfare, all in accordance with a comprehensive plan; and
Case No. Attachment I
ZA00-124 Page 1
WHEREAS, the hereinafter described property is currently zoned as "AG" Agricultural
District under the City's Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, a change in the zoning classification of said property was requested by a
person or corporation having a proprietary interest in said property; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Southlake, Texas, at a public hearing called by
the City Council did consider the following factors in making a determination as to whether these
changes should be granted or denied: safety of the motoring public and the pedestrians using the
facilities in the area immediately surrounding the sites; safety from fire hazards and damages; noise
producing elements and glare of the vehicular and stationary lights and effect of such lights on
established character of the neighborhood; location, lighting and types of signs and relation of signs
to traffic control and adjacent property; street size and adequacy of width for traffic reasonably
expected to be generated by the proposed use around the site and in the immediate neighborhood;
adequacy of parking as determined by requirements of this ordinance for off-street parking facilities;
location of ingress and egress points for parking and off-street loading spaces, and protection of
public health by surfacing on all parking areas to control dust; effect on the promotion of health ad
the general welfare; effect on light and air; effect on the over -crowding of the land; effect on the
concentration of population, and effect on transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks and other
public facilities; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Southlake, Texas, further considered among
other things the character of the districts and their peculiar suitability for particular uses and the
view to conserve the value of the buildings, and encourage the most appropriate use of the land
throughout this City; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Southlake, Texas, does find that there is a
Case No. Attachment I
ZA00-124 Page 2
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:
Case No. Attachment I
ZA00-124 Page 3
Being Tract 2B situated in the John Freeman Survey, Abstract No. 529, and being
approximately 13.675 acres, and more fully and completely described in Exhibit "A"
from "AG" Agricultural District to "CS" Community Service District as depicted on
the approved Site Plan attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit `B".
SECTION 2.
That the City Manager is hereby directed to correct the Official Zoning map of the City 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.
Case No. Attachment I
ZA00-124 Page 4
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 not be affected by this ordinance but may be prosecuted until final
disposition by the courts.
SECTION 9.
Case No. Attachment I
ZA00-124 Page 5
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 , 2001.
MAYOR
ATTEST:
CITY SECRETARY
Case No. Attachment I
ZA00-124 Page 6
PASSED AND APPROVED on the 2nd reading the day of , 2001.
MAYOR
ATTEST:
CITY SECRETARY
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY:
CITY ATTORNEY
DATE:
ADOPTED:
EFFECTIVE:
Case No. Attachment I
ZA00-124 Page 7
EXHIBIT "A"
Being Tract 2B situated in the John Freeman Survey, Abstract No. 529, and being approximately
13.675 acres.
LEGAL DESCRIPTTON.
BEING A TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN THE J" FREEMAN SURVEY, ABSIRACT Na
529. TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS. AND ALSO BEING PART OF A 14.560 ACRE TRACT AS
RECORDED IN VOLUME 122OZ PAGE 212. DEED RECORDS, TARRANT C OLD TY. TEXA.%
AND BEING WOW PARTICULARLY DESCRtBm 8Y METES AND BOUNDS AS FOLLOWS.
BEW"NG AT A 5/8 INCH IRON ROD FOUND FOR CORNER AT THE
SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID 14.75 ACRE TRACT, SAND IRON ROD BEING IN THE
WEST LINE OF A 12-09 ACRE TRACT AS RECORDED IN VCtllME 7180, PAGE 351
OF THE DEED RECORDS OF TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS, SAID IRON ROD ALSO BEING
AT TIC MOST EASTERLY NORTHEAST CORNER OF WOODLAND HECHIS AS RECORDED
IN Vtlt.UM 388-155. PAGE 13 OF THE PUTT RECORDS OF TARRANT COUNTY.
TEXAS
THENCE NORTH 89 DEGREES 22 MINUTES 29 SECONDS WEST FOLLOWING THE
NORTH LINE OF SAID WOODLAND HEIGHTS ADDITION A DISTANCE OF 796.34 FEET
TO A 5/8 INCH IRON RCA FOUND FOR CORNER AT THE El CORNER OF SAID
WOODLAND HEIGHTS ADDITION:
THENCE NORTH 0 DEGREES 38 MINUTES 29 SECONDS WEST FOLLOWING THE
NORTHEAST LINE OF SAID WOODLAND HEIGHTS ADDITION A DISTANCE OF 4-S103
FEET TO A 5/8 INCH IRON ROD FOUND FOR CORNER:
THENCE SOUTH 89 DEGREES 37 MINUTES 45 SECONDS EAST A DISTANCE OF
394.35 FEET TO A 1 /Z NCH IRON ROD SET FOR CARTER;
THENCE NORTH O DEGREES 27 MINUTES 41 SECONDS EAST A DISTANCE OF
553M FEET TID A 1/2 INCH IRON RCA SET FOR CCXt" IN THE SOUTH
RIGHT OF AWAY LINE OF SOUTHLAKE BLVD/P.M. NO.1709 AS CONVEYED TO THE
STATE OF TEXAS AND RECORDED IN VOLUME 988Z. PAGE 391 OF THE DEED
RECORDS OF TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS.
P104CE SOUTH 89 DEGREES 39 MINUTES 56 SECONDS EAST FOLLOWING THE
SOUTH F.O.W. LINE OF SAID SOUTHLAK BLVD/E.M. N0.1709 A DISTANCE OF
425.03 FEET TO A STEEL FENCE E POST FOUND FOR CORNER.
THENCE SOUTH 0 DECREES 31 MINUTES 38 SECONDS WEST A DISTANCE OF
101C120 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING AND CONTAINING 595.670 SQUARE
FEET OR 13.675 ACRES OF LAND..
Case No. Attachment I
ZAOO-124 Page 8
9
EXHIBIT "B"
-F-R�
-ii
RUA- 009'
ZGfID 92
1 L COW M ffN WT(RNAT
'-Vllki
I MAHAR SIR I
A 0',
M I
2 L EVIL
2 2
LLJD= RUML CCMM�--
BLVDis . / FM 17M
L823LT-1 2=
I ------ -- --- -- ------ LlLiL.�
Z [0 OF C ?ClAt
OWNER DALLAS FCRRY
LUD-OFFICE CDAMER
0 ER W CRAIG VALUAM
CRi
LUDILOh' DENSJTY P[9D[NIAI ZONED 81yEA
ZONED SFIA
PIGNEE SrE V1 BUCHANAN
1:-7- 4. L!JC= OFFICE' COMMERCIAL
LJO, OIR NME 1 ZOIJED 81
LOCATION MA I"
80
—00 11-
Pi
IINE CR "E= WR WD A LO 9, RIC r
?CN'D SETA 00 —z-
Ff
S 89,3r45
4L
4,
5L
OWNER OEORCE BARCLA
Tz -CW DEN 7Y FDVNI; L -n---
ZI)NE SFlA 7 +
I Li 1 i
U- Pu 7
N.
OVER LLANE1' rw— COMMERCk
NTj,j
',11- LOW 1111LU OFIC,
" r"
?(KD 0'
RECD
----------------------------- - ------------------------------
x 89 '30* 4 7"' CARNft CD
LlwNF I! T4YLOF CW!4rP lfpSA CHAPMAN i i,= PUNLIC - St'- =UELV, JA
LIK - Low D'N.-IT, Rf9DENHAL L'Jt)= LOW DENT I W.SIKNflAt I ZONECL"
N;D SFIA / "A
N-
Z' OWNER CARL'3- "?R�- ,rD 9!A
0_SITE PLAN LPH.A I LJL- tow DEN 3 Z04f, 7;1" '� PEIJI CASE NUMBER: 7A00-124 A- I
2 1 3 1 1 - I . I I I a I I I . I I 1 0 1 . I .
Case No. Attachment I
ZA00-124 Page 9
City of Southlake
Department of Planning
STAFF REPORT
April 27, 2001
CASE NO: ZA01-042
PROJECT: The Clariden School
REQUEST: The Clariden School is requesting approval of a Rezoning and Concept Plan.
ACTION NEEDED: Consider 1" reading of rezoning and concept plan request.
ATTACHMENTS: (A) Background Information
(B)
Vicinity Map
(C)
Plans and Support Information
(D)
Concept Plan Review Summary
(E)
Traffic Analysis
(F)
Resident Concerns
(G)
Surrounding Property Owner Map
(H)
Ordinance No. 480-363
(I)
Surrounding Property Owner's Responses (attached separately)
(J)
Full Size Plans (for Commission and Council Members Only)
STAFF CONTACT: Tara
Brooks (481-2079)
Ken
Baker (481-2046)
Case No.
ZA01-042
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
OWNER/APPLICANT: The Clariden School
PURPOSE: The purpose of this request is to place "Community Service" district uses
and regulations on the property for development of a private school and to
fulfill the concept plan approval requirements of the "Residential
Adjacency Standards" and the "S-P-2" zoning district requirements. A Site
Plan must be approved prior to issuance of a building permit.
PROPERTY SITUATION: The property is located on the west side of North White Chapel Boulevard
approximately 1,400' south of Bob Jones Road. It is part of the plat of the
Clariden Ranch Subdivision. The properties to the south, west, and north are
zoned "SF -IA" Single Family Residential District. To the east, across North
White Chapel Boulevard, is Bob Jones Park.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: A portion of Tracts 1 and IA, situated in the W. Mills Survey, Abstract No.
877; being 23.050 acres.
LAND USE CATEGORY: Low Density Residential
CURRENT ZONING: "AG" Agricultural
REQUESTED ZONING: "CS" Community Service
AMENDED REQUEST: "S-P-2" Generalized Site Plan District with "CS" Community Service
District uses limited to a private school
PROPOSED USE: Private School (K-12)-Ultimate maximum enrollment 630 students.
HISTORY: -Preliminary Plat for Clariden Ranch was approved by City Council on
1/16/01.
-A motion to rezone this property to S-P-2 with "CS" uses limited to a private
school was denied on March 22, 2001 by P&Z.
TRANSPORTATION
ASSESSMENT: See Attachment E
TRAIL SYSTEM
MASTER PLAN: The Trail System Master Plan does not recommend a trail along the west side
of North White Chapel Boulevard. A Pedestrian/ Bicycle off -road trail is
recommended along the east side of North White Chapel Boulevard. It is
likely that students will be crossing White Chapel Road either during or after
school to utilize the facilities located at Bob Jones Park.
DRAINAGE: The preliminary drainage plan indicates the runoff from the proposed site will
drain south through the Clariden Ranch subdivision and into Kirkwood Creek
Case No. Attachment A
ZA01-042 Page 1
(See Figure #2- Circle 2 on the next page). Kirkwood Creek crosses under
North White Chapel Boulevard before heading northeast to Lake Grapevine.
If the proposed site was developed as a Private School, the drainage
calculations for post development runoff would use a runoff coefficient of 0.7
versus a factor of 0.5 for a residential development. The Clariden School
Concept Plan indicates that build -out will result in 32.5% of the site being
impervious. A typical one (1) acre subdivision will result in approximately
20% impervious coverage.
If Kirkwood Creek can not handle the runoff created by the school site, the
school is required by ordinance to detain the increased runoff on -site. The
Clariden School Concept plan indicates a drainage retention area on the
concept plan.
Also, the South Fork of Kirkwood Creek crosses N. White Chapel Road (See
Figure #2-Circle 3). This crossing of the South Fork Branch of Kirkwood
Creek has flooded White Chapel Boulevard four (4) times -since 1957 due to
backwater conditions from Lake Grapevine. According to the Army Core of
Engineers (Lake Grapevine Office), White Chapel Boulevard has been
flooded four (4) times since 1957 (1957, 1981, 1989 and 1991).
PRO'O ED4'� -
SIT'
l�Lake
Grapevin
r
Kirkwood F
--�-` / Creek--
r `
t S. Fork Brang.41 f' }
Wa er f iq v Kirkwood Creek
t from er
E-,-
Figure #2
WATER AND SEWER: There is an existing 12" water line on the east side of North White Chapel
Boulevard and an existing 8" sanitary sewer line on the west side of North
White Chapel Boulevard.
Case No. Attachment A
ZA01-042 Page 2
ESTIMATED IMPACT
FEES*:
Table #4
Water NA -Calculated with Site Plan
Wastewater NA -Calculated with Site Plan
Roadway $16,277(Roadway Service Area 3
* Final Impact Fees are determined by the Building Services Department at the time of building
permit issuance. The fees shown above only represent estimates prepared by the Planning Department.
P&Z ACTION: April 19, 2001; Approved (6-0) subject to Concept Plan Review Summary
No. 1, dated April 12, 2001, subject to the following:
• "S-P-2" Generalized Site Plan District with "CS" Community Service
District uses limited to a private school with a 700-student capacity;
• lighting design and installation will adhere to relevant city ordinances;
• school will install a continuous northbound left turn lane on White
Chapel Boulevard;
• school will install a crosswalk across White Chapel Boulevard;
• and a flashing school zone will be installed as recommended by staff.
P&Z SPEAKERS: This information will be forwarded to Council before the meeting.
STAFF COMMENTS: Attached is Concept Plan Review Summary No. 1, dated April 12, 2001.
NACommunity Deve1opment\WP-FILES\MEM0\200Icases\01-042ZCP.doc
Case No. Attachment A
ZA01-042 Page 3
Vicinity Map
Clariden School
1000 0 1000 2000 Feet
1�
N
S
E
Case No. Attachment B
ZA01-042 Page 1
0
SrldVIVD M3N �O� N'Vld id�DNO
IOOHDS N3al�ID 3H1
wz-
G.
<
Z�
FI
U-
67ol ii Z°1p GM
No. Attachment C
ZA01-042 Page 1
SP-2 with CS Uses Zoning Change
Zoning Case #ZA01-042 - The Clariden School
19 April 2001
1. Land use of property will be restricted to private school and uses appurtenant to private school
operations.
2. School enrollment will be limited to 700 students.
3. A continuous north -bound left -turn lane will be provided on North White Chapel Blvd. from the
north school entry southward 100' past Clariden Ranch Road and with a 100' taper.
4. Lighting design and installation will adhere to Ordinance No. 693-B (Lighting Ordinance).
Illumination and luminance levels will not exceed values established in the Lighting Ordinance.
Any future variance requests will follow the city's established approval procedure.
5. A striped cross -walk will be provided across North White Chapel Blvd. to connect the school
with Bob Jones Park.
6. A school zone with signage and flashing lights will be provided.
Cc: The Clariden School
Case No. Attachment C
ZA01-042 Page 2
CONCEPT PLAN REVIEW SUMMARY
Case No.: ZA01-042 Review No.: One Date of Review: 04/12/01
Project Name: Concept Plan — Clariden School
APPLICANT:
The Clariden School
1325 N. White Chapel Blvd.
Southlake, TX 76092
Phone: (817) 481-7597
Fax: (817) 424-5561 Attn: Charlane Baccus
ENGINEER:
Carter & Burgess
777 Main Street
Fort Worth, TX 76102
Phone: (817) 735-6281
Fax: (817) 735-6148 Attn: John Brookb
CITY STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE ABOVE REFERENCED PROJECT RECEIVED BY THE CITY ON 04/02/01 AND WE
OFFER THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS. THESE STIPULATIONS ARE HEREBY MADE CONDITIONS OF CONCEPT
PLAN APPROVAL UNLESS SPECIFICALLY AMENDED BY THE CITY COUNCIL. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR
NEED FURTHER CLARIFICATION, PLEASE CONTACT TARA BROOKS AT (817) 481-2079.
1. Provide a continuous left turn lane on N. White Chapel Boulevard extending from the entry street of
Clariden Ranch to the north driveway of this site. The turn lane must extend a minimum of 200' south
of the entry street (200' = min.100' stacking depth + 100' of transition length). This continuous turn
lane is to be constructed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.
2. Provide a pedestrian striped and signed crosswalk across White Chap
el pel Road. Connect to the future
trail system located on the east side of White Chapel Road.
Informational Comments:
Any outside storage, outdoor sale or display also requires that the tenant process and have approved
a specific use permit .
The applicant should be aware that prior to issuance of a building permit a Plat must be processed and
filed in the County Plat Records, and a site plan must be approved by P & Z and City Council. All
plans must be submitted to the building department which would include a fully corrected site plan,
landscape plan, irrigation plan, and building plans. All required fees must be paid. This may include
but not be limited to the following fees: Park Fee, Street, Water & Sewer Impact, Tap Fees, and
related Permit Fees.
This review is based on the "CS" Zoning District Regulations.
* This site falls within the applicability of the residential adjacency standards as amended by Ordinance
480-CC, Section 43, Part III "Residential Adjacency Standards" Although no review of the following
issues is provided with this concept plan, the applicant must evaluate the site for compliance prior to
submittal of the site plan. A Site Plan must be submitted and approved by the Planning and Zoning
Case No. Attachment D
ZA 01-042 Page 1
Commission and City Council prior to issuance of a building permit. Note that these issues are only
the major areas of site plan review and that the applicant is responsible for compliance with all
site plan requirements:
• Masonry requirements per §43.13a, Ordinance 480, as amended and Masonry Ordinance No.
557, as amended.
• Roof design standards per § 43.13b, Ordinance 480, as amended
• Mechanical Equipment Screening per § 43.13c, Ordinance 480, as amended.
• Vertical and horizontal building articulation (required on all building facades) per §43.13d,
Ordinance 480, as amended.
• Building setback standards as per § 43.13h and as shown in exhibit 43-E, Ordinance 480, as
amended.
• Spill -over lighting and noise per §43.13i and §43.13j, Ordinance 480, as amended.
• Off-street parking requirements per §35, Ordinance 480, as amended. All areas intended for
vehicular use must be of an all weather surface material in accordance with the Ordinance No.
480, as amended.
• Screening as per §39.4, Ordinance 480, as amended.
• Interior landscaping per Landscape Ordinance No. 544.
• Fire lanes must be approved by the City Fire Department.
* Denotes Informational Comment
NACOMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT\WP-FILES\MEM0\2001CASES\01-042ZCP.DOC
Case No. Attachment D
ZA 01-042 Page 2
TRAFFIC ANALYSIS
The Thoroughfare Plan recommends that North White Chapel Boulevard be
ultimately designed as a two (2) lane undivided collector (QU-70' R.O.W.)
with 16' travel lanes and a 2' curb and gutter section. Adequate R.O.W. exists
to accommodate the ultimate cross-section. A C2U roadway is designed to
have a maximum service volume of 8,400 vehicle trips per day and still
maintain a level of service D. White Chapel Boulevard is currently operating
at a level of service of B. This section of White Chapel Road has not received
funding in the City's Capital Improvements Program (CIP) for improvements.
Roadway Network
North White Chapel Boulevard is currently a two (2) lane collector roadway
with 35 feet of pavement width and bar ditches.
A planned roadway leading to the recently approved Clariden Ranch
subdivision (Clariden Ranch Road) will be located just south of the site. This
will be a local residential road with 24' of pavement.
Surrounding Land Uses
The subject parcel is located just west of Bob Jones Park along North White
Chapel Boulevard. The approved Crown Ridge Subdivision (49 lots) is
located just to the north of the site. The approved Clariden Ranch Subdivision
(59 lots) is located to the south and west of this property.
Current Traffic Counts
Traffic counts on North White Chapel Boulevard from Dove Street to Bob
Jones Road are as follows (See Table 1):
Table #1
The current traffic counts on North White Chapel Boulevard:
24hr
North Bound NB 1,192
South Bound (SB) (1,120
NB
Peak A.M. 82 6a.m.-7a.m.
Peak P.M. 136 5 .m.-6 .m
SB
Peak A.M. 85 7a.m-8a.m.
Peak P.M. 116 6 .m.-7 .m.
source: City of Southlake 2000 Traffic Count Report
Case No. Attachment E
ZA 01-042 Page 1
Traffic counts on T.W. King from Kirkwood Drive to Bob Jones Road are as
follows (See Table 2):
Table #2
The current traffic counts on T.W Kin .:
24hr
North Bound NB 2,630
South Bound SB 2,351
NB
Peak A.M. 316 7a.m.-8a.m.
Peak P.M. 231 5 .m.-6 .m
SB
Peak A.M. 135 9a.m-10a.m.
Peak P.M. 254 6 .m.-7 .m.
- -'V vJ Ou"Irl aK-wu 1 rapac count Keport
Start and Dismissal Times of the School
Morning Start: 8:00 a.m. Middle and High School
8:30 a.m. Preschool and Elementary School
Afternoon Dismissal: 12:00 noon 1/2 of Preschool
3:00 p.m. 1/2 of Preschool
3:15 Elementary School
3:30 Middle and High School
5:45 Extended Daycare
Enrollment Projections
The initial number of students on campus is estimated to be 200 and will
(W include preschool through Middle School. Ultimate enrollment is projected
to be 630 students, including 160 high school students.
Traffic Impact
Staff has projected the following traffic impact on the surrounding roadway
network during peak traffic times (See Table #3).
Case No. Attachment E
ZA 01-042 Page 2
Table #3
Traffic Impact on Adjacent Street
During Peak Traffic Hours (7:00-8:00 a.m. & 5:00-6:00 p.m.) of
the Adjacent Street Traffic (Ultimate Build-Out-630 Students)
Start Time Shiclenta Y Avv Rat,- Tm, l T.4— r� n..�
8:00 AM
240 x .92
221
139
821
8:30 AM
390 x .92
359
226
133
Nsu
Dismissal 4t,tclPntc Y Avo Rnt,- 'P-+mil r-;-., T- 1-%-,
Noon
85 x .64
18
18
24 ~
3:00 P.M.
60 x .64
17
17
22
3:15 P.M.
144 x .64
62
62
82
3:30 P.M.
154 x .64
66
66
88
5:45 P.M. 126
x .64
11
11
15
19111
Source: Planning Department/ITE Trip Generation Handbook, e Edition
Total Daily Vehicle Trins
Staff has projected that this site will generate approximately 1,000 vehicle trips
per day. Nearly 100% of trips generated from the site will be primary trips;
therefore, it is projected that approximately 1,000 new trips will be added to
the adjacent roadway system if the site is approved.
2025 Modeled Traffic Volumes
The North Central Texas Council of Governments' Transportation Department
projected that 24-hour traffic volumes in 2025 along N. White Chapel
Boulevard will be 7,802 trips per day. However, the model likely assumed
that the subject tract would be developed residentially. It is estimated that if
this tract is developed residentially, the site will add approximately 200 trips
per day unto the surrounding roadways. As mentioned above, staff has
projected that the school site will generate approximately 1,000 vehicle trips.
White Chapel Boulevard's ultimate designed can handle up to 8,400 vehicle
trips per day and still function at a level of service D.
Carter and Burgess has conducted a Traffic Impact Analysis for the Clariden
School. The findings of the study concluded that the intersection analyses
indicates no significant impact is anticipated to the level of service at the
intersections with the addition of the school traffic, either in 2002 or 2010.
(See pages 14 & 15 of this memo).
Case No. Attachment E
ZA 01-042 Page 3
Overview Internal Circulation
The entrance to the school site will be from the northern drive along White
Chapel Boulevard. This drive will connect to a loop drive on site. The exit
from the school site will be from the southern drive that accesses onto Clariden
Ranch Road. The drives entering and exiting the site are double lanes. The
arrows on the concept plan below indicate the internal traffic flow on site (See
Figure #1).
Figure # 1
Stacking Analysis for Clariden Under Maximum Enrollment (630 Students)
A stacking analysis for the Clariden School was prepared by Carter and
Burgess per the Planning Department's request. Below is a summary of the
report provided by Carter and Burgess.
Case No. Attachment E
ZA 01-042 Page 4
I. 8:00 A.M. Start Time (High School and Middle School) -Table #4
Table #4
Assumptions utilized for High School and Middle School analysis:
• 139 Vehicles Inbound (See Table 3)
• The 139 Vehicles will all arrive over a fifteen minute period. This results in 9.27
per minute.
• Allow each vehicle three minutes (3) to unload=28 minutes in the que.
• Each vehicle requires 20 feet of stacking length.
Stacking Availability- 8:00 A.M. Start Time -High School & Middle School
• Entry Road is 475 feet x 2 lanes = 950 feet
• 100 feet to the high school drop off = 100 feet
• 200 feet to middle school drop off = 200 feet
Total staking availability on site is 1,250 feet
Total stacking availability on and off -site =1, 915 feet (.36 mile).
Availability stacking versus inbound vehicles Available stacking versus inbound
vehicles:
• 1,250 feet available /20 feet per vehicle = 62 vehicles accommodated on property.
• 28 Vehicles in queue / Capacityfor 62 vehicles = 45% of on property capacity in use.
H. 8:30 AM Preschool and Elementary School Start Time-TnhlP #tS
Table #5
Assumptions utilized for the Preschool and Elementary School analysis:
• 226 Vehicles Inbound (See Table 3)
• The vehicles will arrive over a fifteen minute period = 15.07 vehicles per minute.
• Allowing an average of three minutes per vehicle to unload = 45
vehicles in queue.
• Each vehicle requires 20 feet of stacking length.
Stacking Availability:
• 475 feet entry roadway times two lanes = 950 feet
• 300 feet to first Elementary School Drop-off = 300 feet
Total staking availability on site is 1,250 feet
Total stacking availability on and off -site =1, 915 feet (.36 mile).
�W
Case No.
ZA 01-042
Attachment E
Page 5
Available stacking versus inbound vehicles: (Table #5 -Continued)
• 1,620 feet available /20 feet per vehicle = 81 vehicles accommodated on property
• 45 Vehicles in queue / Capacityfor 81 vehicles = 56% of on property capacity in use.
III. 3:15 PM Elementary School Release Time -Table #6
Table #6
Assumptions utilized for the Preschool and Elementary School analysis:
62 Trips Inbound
82 Trips Outbound
Assuming an initial stacking of 20 vehicles from the 20 extra trips going outbound tf
arrived prior to the 62 inbound trips, and assuming the 62 inbound trips arrive over a
ten minute period, then; 62 / 10 = 6.2 vehicle per minute. Allowing an average of fil
minutes per vehicle to load = 31 vehicles in queue. Adding the 20 vehicles in initial
stack = 51 vehicles in queue.
Stacking Availability:
• 475 feet entry roadway times two lanes = 950 feet
• 300 feet to first Elementary School Entrance = 300 feet
• 370 feet to second Elementary School Entrance = 370 feet
• Total stacking availability = 1,620 feet
Available stacking versus inbound vehicles:
• 1, 620 feet available / 20 feet per vehicle = 81 vehicles accommodated on property
• 51 Vehicles in queue / Capacityfor 81 vehicles = 63 % of on property capacity in i
IV. 3:30 PM Middle and High School Release Time Vehicles -Table
#7
Table #7
Assumptions used for the Middle School and High School analysis:
66 Trips Inbound
88 Trips Outbound
Assuming an initial stacking of 22 vehicles from the 22 extra trips going outbound d
arrived prior to the 66 inbound trips, and assuming the 66 inbound trips arrive over a
ten minute period, then; 66 / 10 = 6.6 vehicle per minute. Allowing an average of fil
minutes per vehicle to load = 33 vehicles in queue. Adding the 22 vehicles in initial
stack = 55 vehicles in queue.
Case No. Attachment E
ZA 01-042 Page 6
Stacking Availability:
• 475 feet entry roadway times two lanes = 950 feet
• 100 feet to High School Entrance = 100 feet
• 200 feet to Middle School Entrance = 200 feet
• Total stacking availability = 1,250 feet
Available stacking versus inbound vehicles (Table #7 Continued):
• 1,250 feet available /20 feet per vehicle = 62 vehicles accommodated on property
• 55 Vehicles in queue / Capacityfor 62 vehicles = 89% of on property capacity in use.
Findings of the Stacking Analysis
This analysis assumed that all stacking would occur prior to the desired
entrance location. The results of the analysis show that all of the queuing for
the school morning drop-offs and afternoon pick-ups should be accommodated
on the school property. The morning drop-offs should be accomplished using
just over half of the available stacking space leading to the appropriate school
entrances on the property. Picking up in the afternoon should also be
accomplished within the available stacking space leading to the entrances. The
elementary school pick-up is estimated to use 63% of the stacking capacity and
the middle and high school pick-up is estimated to use 89% of the stacking
capacity. However, the 89% use may be overstated due to some of the high
school students driving their own cars and therefore not being in the queue.
It is also unlikely that the older students would take as long to load into the
vehicles.
The Carter and Burgess analysis did not consider two (2) areas that may be
utilized for stacking. First, the analysis did not factor in the 655' continuous
turn lane along White Chapel Boulevard. This continuous turn lane can
accommodate up to 32 vehicles for stacking purposes. Second, the analysis
did not factor in the additional 500 feet south of the circle roadway that could
be used for stacking an additional 25 vehicles with proper safety/traffic control
supervision. In addition, ample parking will also be available on the property
for parents who need to run into the school, so they won't interrupt the flow
of traffic in the queue.
Transportation Factors to Consider
• The AM peak traffic time for the school and AM peak traffic times for the
surrounding roadways will occur during the same general time period.
• The school site is projected to generate approximately 800 more vehicle
trips per day than if the site was developed residentially.
Case No. Attachment E
ZA 01-042 Page 7
• Trip counts along the surrounding roadways during the AM Peak Time will
increase with the development of the Crown Ridge and Clariden Ranch
Subdivisions.
• The PM peak traffic time for the school is earlier in the day than the peak
P.M. traffic times for the surrounding roadways.
• The peak traffic times for Bob Jones Park occur in the evenings and on
Saturdays and Sundays.
• The overall level of service at the existing and future intersections in the
area will remain the same or decrease slightly with a private school
locating at the subject site.
• Current drive design in conjunction with the continuous left turn lane along
White Chapel Road is sufficient to handle the school's vehicle stacking
demand.
Transportation Recommendations
Based on the review of the proposed concept plan and traffic information, staff
is making the following recommendations in regards to transportation
improvements:
1. In order to ensure the safest possible traffic circulation and turning
movements near the school and to build in additional capacity into the
intersections along White Chapel Road, staff recommends that the school
provide a continuous left turn lane on N. White Chapel Boulevard
extending from the entry street of Clariden Ranch to the north driveway of
this site. The turn lane must extend a minimum of 200' south of the entry
street (200' = min.100' stacking depth + 100' of transition length). This
turn lane should be constructed prior to the issuance of Certificate of
Occupancy.
2. To increase safety for students, faculty and residents crossing White
Chapel Boulevard, provide a pedestrian striped and signed crosswalk
across White Chapel Road. Connect to the future trail system located on
the east side of White Chapel Road.
Case No. Attachment E
ZA 01-042 Page 8
Table 4
Projected 2010 Background Traffic Intersection Level of Service
AM Peak Hour
Afternoon Peak Hour
TW King
Clariden
Ranch Road
Approach
Direction
Westbound
Northbound
Movement
Left
Right
Through
Traffic
Volume
25
5
65
Approach
Intersection
TrahlC
Volume
20
1
64
roach
Intersection
Average
DelayLeval
gA
of
A
Avarapa
Delay
9.4
Level o
A
rDa
s!
9.2
Level of
Service
A
AverageIntersecfion
Delay
(Seconds/
92
Levels/Service
Service
A
Right
to
30
Southbound
Left
1
7.4
A
2
7.4
A
Through
85
30
While Chapel
CIvd N Iarden@
Ranch Road
White Chapel
Blvd N @
Dove Road
Kirkwood Blvd
Dove Road
Eastbound
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Leh
Right
Left
Through
Through
Right
Left
2
12
4
71
200
1
48
9.5
7 7
12.0
A
A
B
1
g.5
12.0
29.64
A
B
D
2
6
18
165
70
1
32
9.0
7.4
9.7
A
A
A
9.0
9.7
8.36
A
A
A
Right
199
155
Northbound
Left
Through
308
27
8.5
A
117
7.6
A
755
Southbound
Eastbound
Through
26
40.87
E
16
8.6
A
Right
Left
184
639
60
82
Through
224
133
Westbound
Through
392
16.11
C
119
8.23
A
Right
100
30
Southbound
Leh
43
10.56
B
54
7.97
A
Right
117
354
Whit. Chapel
Blvd. N Q SH
114
Eastbound
Lett
136
15-8
C
11.6
B
45
13.1
B
11.1
B
Through
70
39
Right
108
111
Westbound
Left
65
24.1
C
71
20.8
C
Through
45
27
Right
49
48
Northbound
Left
149
14.9
B
55
14.4
B
Through
150
179
Right
55
30
Soulhbound
Lef
67
78.4
C
35
12.It
B
Through
60
55
81
Ri M
90
Case No. Attachment E
ZA 01-042 Page 9
Table 5
Projected 2010 Intersection Level of Service with Clariden School
AM
Peak
Hour
Afternoon
Peak
Hour
In[ ersach-
Approach
Direction
Movemertl
Traffic
Volume
A roach
Intersection
Tratec
Voume
Approach
Intersection
Average
Delay
(Seconds/
Level or
Service
Average
Delay
(Seconds/
Level .1
Service
Average
Delay
(Seconds/
Level of
Service
Average
Daley
(Bewntls/
Level
Service
TW King
Clanden
Ranch Road
Weslbound
Northbound
Left
Right
Through
Right
25
5
65
10
9.4
A
9 4
A
40
1
y,
30
9.2
A
9.2
A
Soulntround
Left
Thou h
1
85
74
A
2
30
7.4
A
While Chapel
Blvd
CI nda,
Ranch Road
White Chapel
Blvd N L
Clandan
School
Entrance
While Chapel
Blvd N @
Dove Road
Eastbound
Northbound
Southbound
Northbound
Eastbound
Northbound
Left
Right
Left
Through
Through
Ri ht
Leh
TTrW h
g
Through Through
Ridht
Lot
Right
Left
6
222
4
429
2011
1
359
72
201
7
64
199
308
11.t
7 7
8.7
24.4
e1
B
A
A
C
A
11.1
8.7
244
B
A
C
8
192
18
307
70
1
142
165
71
Z
39
155
9.6
7 4
7.7
11.8
A
A
A
B
9.6
7.7
1.8
A
A
B
117
0.1
A
Through
389
286
Sorthbound
Through
228
193
Pi hl
194
69
Eastbound
Left
Through
639
240
44.48
E
B2
140
8.67
A
Kirkwood Blvd
® Dave Road
Weatbountl
Through
Right
102
100
16 .et
C
31.96
D
130 0
3
8.31
A
8.42
A
Southbound
Left
Right
43
117
10.61
B
54
35
8.01
A
Let
184
61
Eastbound
Through
70
18.2
C
39
17.1
C
Right
108
111
Left
65
71
While chapel
Blvd. N @ SH
114
Westbound
23.8
C
12.2
B
22.6
C
11.0
B
Through
45
27
Right
146
82
Left
157
55
Westround
15.3
C
15.0
B
Through
347
264
Lght
55
30
et
109
79
Soutnbountl
17.6
C
1t.2
B
Through
187
167
Riahl
121
102
WET M."R 2 0 2001
Case No. Attachment E
ZA 01-042 Page 10
During the P&Z public hearing held on March 22, 2001 for case number ZA01-017, a number
ofconcerns and questions were raised by citizens during the public hearing. Below is a list with
a staff response.
SAFETY RELATED ISSUES:
1. What are the current fire/rescue and police response times to
the proposed Clariden School site?
STAFF RESPONSE: Fire & Rescue -7 minutes and 37 seconds;
Police - 6 minutes and 46 seconds.
2. What are the estimated fire/rescue and police response times
to the Clariden School site once the DPS north facility located
at the intersection of Dove Street and N. White Chapel
Boulevard is constructed?
STAFF RESPONSE: The current goal for emergency response within
the response area of the city is to respond and arrive within 7
minutes 30 seconds (medical/injured persons) and 8 minutes 30
seconds (fire/haz-mat related incidents) 80% of the time. When the
North DPS facility is constructed, the goal will be reduced to five
minute response times within it's response area, 90% of the time.
3. What is the City's best guess regarding the timing of the
construction of the DPS North facility?
STAFF RESPONSE: Assuming that the Crime Control and
Prevention District tax is reauthorized and approved by the City's
voters, it is expected that the facility will be constructed sometime in
2005 or 2006.
4. Will emergency vehicles be able to access the proposed school
site if White Chapel Boulevard is flooded by the South Fork
of the Kirkwood Branch?
STAFF RESPONSE: Yes, emergency vehicles may reach the site by
traveling west of State Highway 114 and exiting at Kirkwood
Boulevard. The vehicles would then travel west and then north along
T. W. King to the proposed Clariden Ranch Road. DPS vehicles may
return to the station by traveling south on T. W. King and then west
on State Highway 114 to Precinct Line Road in Trophy Club. There
is a turnaround at this location that will allow the vehicles to reverse
course and head east on State Highway 114 and return to the station.
Case No. Attachment F
ZA 01-042 Page 1
5. Will the school site result in increased emergency response
times due to narrow roads with no shoulder & school vehicle
obstruction?
STAFF RESPONSE: As mentioned in the stacking analysis, staff
believes that the site in conjunction with the continuous center turn
lane can adequately handle stacking of the school site and will not
block the travel lanes.
DRAINAGE RELATED ISSUES
6. What is the frequency of the South Fork of the Kirkwood
Branch flooding White Chapel Boulevard?
STAFF RESPONSE: According to the Core of Engineers, White
Chapel Boulevard has been flooded four (4) times since 1957. (1957,
1981, 1989 and 1991). There are no records that indicate an
incidence in the past fifty years that both White Chapel Boulevard
and T. W. King have been flooded. See the drainage section of this
memo.
7. Will the increased impervious surface coverage increase the
rate of the Grapevine Lake rise.
STAFF RESPONSE: The Clariden School Concept Plan indicates
that build -out will result in 32.5% of the site being impervious. A
typical one (1) acre subdivision will result in approximately 20%
impervious coverage. Therefore, a school site will contribute more
runoff than a typical one (1) acre subdivision. As mentioned in the
drainage section of this memo, if Kirkwood Creek can not handle
the runoff created by the school site, the school is required by
ordinance to detain the increased runoff on -site. The Clariden School
Concept plan indicates a drainage retention area on the concept
plan.
FINANCIAL RELATED ISSUES
8. Will the Clariden School be exempt from City taxes?
STAFF RESPONSE: To be exempt from paying property taxes, the
school will need to submit an application for property tax exemption
to the Denton County Appraisal District. The school may qualify for
exempt status under Section 11.21 of the Texas Property Tax Code.
Also, the school must be organized as a charitable organization. The
current City tax rate is 0.422001$100 assessed value.
Case No. Attachment F
ZA 01-042 Page 2
9. What is the % of families that have children attending
Clariden School are Southlake residents?
STAFF RESPONSE: Currently 38 out of the 80 families attending the
Clariden School reside in Southlake.
CARROLL SCHOOL DISTRICT ISSUES
10. Will the C.I.S.D. lose full time equivalent students if the
Clariden School is approved? Does this result in a monetary
loss to the C.I.S.D.?
STAFF RESPONSE: It is dijficult to project how many students may
attend the Clariden School versus the Carroll Public Schools. For
every child that attends a public school, the C.I.S.D. receives
approximately $4,500.
11. Is another C LS.D. elementary planned at White Chapel &
Dove Street?
STAFF RESPONSE: Yes, Elementary School #6 is scheduled to open
in the fall of 2004. This project will be included in the 2002 Bond
Election.
12. Will there be an increase on the City budget for eventual road
improvements on White Chapel Boulevard to accommodate
the school?
STAFF RESPONSE: Staff is recommending that the Clariden School
construct the continuous center turn lane along White Chapel
Boulevard prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. The
portion of White Chapel Boulevard from State Highway 114 to Dove
Street (A5U-94) is scheduled to be funded in FY2001-02 Capital
Improvements Program (CIP) and will likely be improved during FY
2003 whether or not the school locates at the subject site. The
portion of White Chapel Boulevard north of Dove Street is currently
not funded in the CIP. It is not known if the location of the Clariden
School will result in City Council moving the White Chapel
Boulevard north of Dove Street project up as a CIP priority. Also,
it is not known if the City Council will allow the school to take
Roadway Impact Fee credits towards the construction of the
continuous center turn lane. This will be determined during at the
Developer's Agreement phase.
Case No. Attachment F
ZA 01-042 Page 3
TRANSPORTATION ISSUES
13. Will the school at this location result in excessive traffic along
White Chapel Road?
Staff Response: The school site at build -out is projected to generate
approximately 800 more vehicle trips per day than a if this property
was developed residentially. See traffic information in this memo.
14. Will excessive vehicle stacking occur at pick-up and drop-off
times?
STAFF RESPONSE: The site design and the continuous turn lane
along White Chapel Road can adequately handle stacking on site.
See stacking information in this memo.
15. Are the hours of operation incompatible with the adjacent
surrounding land uses?
STAFF RESPONSE: The AMpeak traffic time for the school and AM
peak traffic times for the surrounding roadways will occur during the
same general time period. The PMpeak traffic time for the school is
earlier in the day than the peak P.M. traffic times for the surrounding
roadways.
LIGHTING ISSUE
16. How will possible future lighting of the athletic fields effect
surrounding properties?
STAFF RESPONSE: The Concept Plan as submitted does not
indicate the lighting of the sport's fields. If the Clariden School
intends to light the fields, the applicant will need to indicate the
location of the lights on the site plan and likely need to request a
variance to the City's Lighting Ordinance. Until a site plan is
submitted indicating the type of lights, the location and the height, it
is difficult for the staff to evaluate the impact on surrounding
residential properties.
LAND USE PLAN ISSUE
17. Is a private school use inconsistent with the Land Use Plan?
STAFF RESPONSE: The City of Southlake Land Use Plan states
"The Low Density Residential category is for detached single-family
residential development at a net density of one or fewer dwelling
Case No. Attachment F
ZA 01-042 Page 4
units per acre. Other suitable activities are those permitted in Public
Parks/Open Space and Public/Semi-Public categories described
previously. The Low Density Residential category encourages
openness and rural character of the City of Southlake". Private
schools are listed as a suitable use in the Public/Semi Public land use
category.
Case No. Attachment F
ZA 01-042 Page 5
Surrounding Property Owners
� Clariden School
Property Owner
Zoning
Land Use Description
Acreage
1. Southlake-Solana
1. SF-lA
1. Low Density Residential
1.
38.65
2. City of Southlake
2. AG
2. Public Parks/Open Space
2.
117.86
3. R. Galvin
3. AG
3. Low Density Residential
3.
31.12
4. B. Lamoreaux
4. AG
4. Low Density Residential
4.
31.87
Case No. Attachment G
ZA 01-042 Page 1
CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS
ORDINANCE NO.480-363
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 480, AS
AMENDED, THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE OF
THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS; GRANTING A ZONING
CHANGE ON A CERTAIN TRACT OR TRACTS OF LAND
WITHIN THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS BEING LEGALLY
DESCRIBED AS A PORTION OF TRACTS 1 AND IA,
SITUATED IN THE W. MILLS SURVEY, ABSTRACT NO. 877
AND BEING 23.050 ACRES, AND MORE FULLY AND
COMPLETELY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT "A" FROM "AG"
AGRICULTURAL TO "S-P-2" GENERALIZED SITE PLAN
DISTRICT WITH "CS" COMMUNITY SERVICE USES LIMITED
TO PRIVATE SCHOOL AND USES APPURTENANT TO
PRIVATE SCHOOL OPERATIONS, AS DEPICTED ON THE
APPROVED CONCEPT PLAN ATTACHED HERETO AND
INCORPORATED HEREIN AS EXHIBIT `B", SUBJECT TO THE
SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS CONTAINED IN THIS
ORDINANCE; CORRECTING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP;
PRESERVING ALL OTHER PORTIONS OF THE ZONING
ORDINANCE; DETERMINING THAT THE PUBLIC INTEREST,
MORALS AND GENERAL WELFARE DEMAND THE ZONING
CHANGES AND AMENDMENTS HEREIN MADE; PROVIDING
THAT THIS ORDINANCE SHALL BE CUMULATIVE OF ALL
ORDINANCES; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE;
PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY FOR VIOLATIONS HEREOF;
PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR
PUBLICATION IN THE OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER; AND
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the City of Southlake, Texas is a home rule City acting under its Charter
adopted by the electorate pursuant to Article XI, Section 5 of the Texas Constitution and Chapter
9 of the Texas Local Government Code; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 211 of the Local Government Code, the City has the
authority to adopt a comprehensive zoning ordinance and map regulating the location and use of
buildings, other structures and land for business, industrial, residential and other purposes, and to
amend said ordinance and map for the purpose of promoting the public health, safety, morals and
general welfare, all in accordance with a comprehensive plan; and
Case No. Attachment H
ZA 01-042 Page 1
WHEREAS, the hereinafter described property is currently zoned as "AG" Agriclutural
under the City's Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, a change in the zoning classification of said property was requested by a
person or corporation having a proprietary interest in said property; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Southlake, Texas, at a public hearing called by
the City Council did consider the following factors in making a determination as to whether these
changes should be granted or denied: safety of the motoring public and the pedestrians using the
facilities in the area immediately surrounding the sites; safety from fire hazards and damages; noise
producing elements and glare of the vehicular and stationary lights and effect of such lights on
established character of the neighborhood; location, lighting and types of signs and relation of signs
to traffic control and adjacent property; street size and adequacy of width for traffic reasonably
expected to be generated by the proposed use around the site and in the immediate neighborhood;
adequacy of parking as determined by requirements of this ordinance for off-street parking facilities;
location of ingress and egress points for parking and off-street loading spaces, and protection of
public health by surfacing on all parking areas to control dust; effect on the promotion of health ad
the general welfare; effect on light and air; effect on the. over -crowding of the land; effect on the
concentration of population, and effect on transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks and other
public facilities; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Southlake, Texas, further considered among
other things the character of the districts and their peculiar suitability for particular uses and the
view to conserve the value of the buildings, and encourage the most appropriate use of the land
throughout this City; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Southlake, Texas, does find that there is a
Case No. Attachment H
ZA 01-042 Page 2
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:
Case No. Attachment H
ZA 01-042 Page 3
Being a portion of Tracts 1 and IA, situated in the W. Mills Survey, Abstract No.
877, and being 23.050 acres, and more fully and completely described in Exhibit "A"
from "AG" Agriculutural to "S-P-2" Generalized Site Plan District with CS"
community service uses limited to a private school and uses appurtenant to private
school operations as depicted on the approved Site Plan attached hereto and
incorporated herein as Exhibit `B", and subject to the specific conditions established
in the motion of the City Council and attached hereto and incorporated herein as
Exhibit "C."
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
Case No. Attachment H
ZA 01-042 Page 4
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 not be affected by this ordinance but may be prosecuted until final
Case No. Attachment H
ZA 01-042 Page 5
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
MAYOR
ATTEST:
day of , 2001.
CITY SECRETARY
Case No. Attachment H
ZA 01-042 Page 6
PASSED AND APPROVED on the 2nd reading the day of , 2001.
MAYOR
ATTEST:
CITY SECRETARY
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY:
CITY ATTORNEY
DATE:
ADOPTED:
EFFECTIVE:
Case No. Attachment H
ZA 01-042 Page 7
EXHIBIT "A"
THE CLARIDEN SCHOOL
Preliminary Metes and Bounds Description of Property
Note: Plat pending. Preliminary Plat has been approved as Clariden Ranch Addn., Block 1 Lot 7, City of
Southlake, Denton County, TX.
BEING a parcel of land out of a 31.876 acre tract of land situated in the W. Mills Survey Abstract Number
877, in the City of Southlake, Denton County, Texas, that same tract of land conveyed to John R. Galvin
and described as Exhibit C in a Partition Deed recorded in Volume 2238 at Page 541 of the Deed Records
of Denton County, Texas (hereinafter referred to as D.R.D.C.T.)
AND out of a 31.877 acre tract of land situated in the W. Mills Survey Abstract 877 in the City of Southlake,
Denton County, Texas, that same tract of land conveyed to Barbara G. Lamoreaux and described as Exhibit
B in a Partition Deed recorded in Volume 2238 at Page 541 of the D.R.D.C.T., said parcel being more fully
described as follows:
Commencing at a '/2-inch steel rod set for corner at the southwest corner of a tract of land conveyed to Earl
Sproles as shown in a deed recorded in Volume 446 at Page 14 D.R.D.C.T., said %2-inch steel rod being on
the west side of a public road known as T.W. King Road;
THENCE along the west side of said public road the following:
North 00 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East, a distance of 891.51 feet to a '/2-inch steel rod set for
corner;
North 29 degrees 20 minutes 40 seconds East, a distance of 261.64 feet to a '/2-inch steel rod set for
corner;
North 21 degrees 45 minutes 00 seconds East, a distance of 100.35 feet to a '/2-inch steel rod set for
corner;
North 13 degrees 32 minutes 00 seconds East, a distance of 100.00 feet to a '/2-inch steel rod set for
corner from which a found 5/8-inch steel rod bears North 66 degrees 43 minutes 09 seconds East, a
distance of 2.94 feet;
THENCE South 89 degrees 54 minutes 29 seconds East, departing from the west line of said public road, at
a distance of 463.67 feet passing a '/2-inch steel rod found for corner at the southeast corner of a called 2.0
acre tract of land conveyed to Linnie Johnson as shown in a deed recorded in Volume 373 at Page 195
D.R.D.C.T. and continuing along the south line of a called 38.646 acre tract of land conveyed to
Southlake/Solana, Ltd. as shown in a deed recorded in Volume 4033 at Page 1933 D.R.D.C.T. for a total
distance of 909.72 feet to a '/2-inch steel rod set for corner and being the northwest corner of a tract of land
conveyed to Barbara G. Lamoreaux and described in a Partition Deed recorded in Volume 2238 at Page
541 of the said Denton County Deed Records;
THENCE South 89 degrees 49 minutes 45 seconds East, continuing along the south line of said
Southlake/Solana Tract and along the north line of said Lamoreaux Tract a distance of 1059.91 feet to a '/2-
inch steel rod for corner and being the north common corner between said Lamoreaux Tract and said
Galvin Tract and being the POINT OF BEGINNING;
2-Ac t -o 1 -?
RFC11 FEB .12 2001
Case No. Attachment H
ZA 01-042 Page 8
THENCE South 89 degrees 49 minutes 45 seconds East, along the common line between said
South lake/Solana Tract and said Galvin Tract, a distance of 1059.91 feet to a P.K. nail and shiner
set for corner in the approximate centerline of White Chapel Road (a public road);
THENCE South 00 degrees 19 minutes 00 seconds West, along the approximate centerline of White
Chapel Road, a distance of 904.44 feet to a point for corner;
THENCE South 89 degrees 56 minutes 45 seconds West, a distance of 298.92 feet to a point;
THENCE along a curve to the left having a radius of 580.00 feet, a tangent of 113.52 feet, a delta of
22 degrees 08 minutes and 56 seconds and an arc length of 224.21 feet to a point;
THENCE South 67 degrees 47 minutes 49 seconds West, a distance of 62.92 feet to a point;
THENCE along a curve to the right having a radius of 514.00 feet, a tangent of 106.64 feet, a delta
of 23 degrees 26 minutes and 27 seconds and an arc length of 210.29 feet to a point;
THENCE North 88 degrees 45 minutes 45 seconds West, a distance of 93.05 feet to a point;
THENCE North 05 degrees 24 minutes 34 seconds West, a distance of 245.92 feet to a point;
THENCE along a non -tangent curve to the right with a chord bearing North 46 degrees 23 minutes
55 seconds West; a distance of 177.42 feet and having a radius of 212.76 feet, a tangent of 97.60
feet, a delta of 49 degrees 17 minutes 09 seconds and an arc length of 183.01 feet to a point;
THENCE North 16 degrees 38 minutes 19 seconds West, a distance of 177.10 feet to a point;
THENCE along a non -tangent curve to the left with a chord bearing North 25 degrees 26 minutes 49
seconds West; a distance of 178.57 feet and having a radius of 553.88 feet, a tangent of 90.47 feet,
a delta of 18 degrees 33 minutes 12 seconds and an arc length of 179.35 feet to a point;
THENCE North 34 degrees 07 minutes 49 seconds West, a distance of 41.98 feet to a point;
THENCE North 04 degrees 47 minutes 17 seconds East, a distance of 279.05 feet to a point;
THENCE South 89 degrees 49 minutes 31 seconds East along the common line between said
Southlake/Solana Tract and along the north line of said Lamoreaux Tract, a distance of 98.63 feet to
the POINT OF BEGINNING;
and CONTAINING 23.050 acres of land more or less.
Case No. Attachment H
ZA 01-042 Page 9
EXHIBIT "B"
MdWS M3N 803 N"qd 1d3DN0D
ssarunqzJaPD
IOOHDS N w
RM
117
TOLT �7 ,,,E f,
0
Case No. Attachment H
ZA0I-042 Page 10
EXHIBIT "B"
SP-2 with CS Uses Zoning Change
Zoning Case #ZA01-042 - The Clariden School
19 April 2001
7. Land use of property will be restricted to private school and uses appurtenant to private
school operations.
8. School enrollment will be limited to 700 students.
9. A continuous north -bound left -turn lane will be provided on North White Chapel Blvd.
from the north school entry southward 100' past Clariden Ranch Road and with a 100'
taper.
10. Lighting design and installation will adhere to Ordinance No. 693-B (Lighting
Ordinance). Illumination and luminance levels will not exceed values established in the
Lighting Ordinance. Any future variance requests will follow the city's established
approval procedure.
11. A striped cross -walk will be provided across North White Chapel Blvd. to connect the
school with Bob Jones Park.
12. A school zone with signage and flashing lights will be provided.
Cc: The Clariden School
Case No. Attachment H
ZA01-042 Page 11
EXHIBIT "C"
This page reserved for the approved City Council motion.
Case No. Attachment H
ZA01-042 Page 12