Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
1994-09-06 CC packet
City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM September 2, 1994 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council FROM: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager SUBJECT: Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest for City Council Meeting September 6, 1994 1. I have been in meetings or on the telephone most of today with citizens who insisted they be able to speak to me concerning drainage related matters and the proposed Coventry development. As a result, I will only be able to touch on the most significant issues in regard to the agenda. If you should have any questions not addressed in my memo, please feel free to call me or the Directors. (W. 2. Agenda Item No. 4C. SPIN Report will be given for Neighborhood #11, chaired by Ronald Maness and Robin Jones and Neighborhood #13, chaired by Camille Rasdal and Rick Patterson. 3. Agenda Item No 5A. Authorizing the Mayor to execute an agreement for Professional Audit Services. The City Charter requires the City Council to have an independent audit at the end of each fiscal year. The City contracted with Weaver and Tidwell for the last five years. During that time we have made substantial improvements in our financial reporting. Mostly, the improvements can be attributed to the work of Lou Ann Heath, Finance Director, however, some of the credit rightly should be shared by the auditors. As Lou Ann points out in her memo, each of the firms submitting proposals meet the technical requirements necessary to conduct the audit. However, for the reasons set out in her memo, both Lou Ann and I recommend the City again select Weaver and Tidwell. Our ranking of the firms is as follows: Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest September 2, 1994 Page 2 Amount 1. - Weaver and Tidwell $18,500 2. Rutledge Crain $14-9950 3. Patillo, Brown $16,900 4. Day and Wagner $18,200 The difference between the high "bid," Weaver and Tidwell, and low "bid," Rutledge Crain, is only $3,500. (Note: technically these are not bids but fee estimates; state law prohibits Certified Public Accountants from competitively bidding contracts for auditing services with municipalities.) Weaver and Tidwell audits a number of cities in this area as noted on page 25 of their proposal. Included are a number of the rapid-growth cities: Addison, Carrollton, Coppell, Frisco, Grapevine, Keller, and Lewisville. This is important in that we have many of the same financial issues. Rutledge Crain audits primarily rural counties and smaller cities which are not experiencing high growth; Municipal clients include the Cities of Alvarado, Midlothian, Pantego, Eastland, Ranger, Forest Hill, Stephenville, and Waxahachie. The latter two are larger than Southlake but have little in common. Our concern with Patillo, Brown has to do with their location in Waco, not their technical ability. An area city that used Patillo, Brown had occasions where they had to meet the auditors half-way in order to review documents. Our concern with Day and Wagner is that they are an unknown. Given all the factors, I support Lou Ann's recommendation that the City Council appoint Weaver and Tidwell to conduct our audit for 1994, with the City's option to renew for an additional four (4) years. 4. Agenda Item No. 5D. Revisions to the Corridor Study Professional Services Contract. Concerning the funding for the expanded scope of services for the Corridor Study, Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest September 2, ;994 Page 3 please note the following has been incorporated in the proposed FY 94-95 budget since the budget work session: (1) the Trail System Master Plan that had been previously budgeted for $20,000 under 150.230 (Community Development-Professional Services) has been shifted to Special Revenue Fund (Park Dedication Fees) as an expenditure for Professional Services. This is appropriate since the Trail System Master Plan is a park project; (2) the additional$15,000 necessary to fund the expanded scope of the Corridor Study will come from the $20,000 already included in the 150.230 line item budget originally planned to fund the trail plan. Thus no additional change in the line item, as suggested by Greg in his memo, is necessary. 5. Agenda Item No. 5G. Permission to advertise for bids for Bicentennial Park expansion. There has been considerable expression of displeasure by some concerning the delays in tw the scheduling of the expansion to Bicentennial Park. Please note the memo from Kim McAdams, Park Project Manager, concerning the delays. Recall that staff was concerned from the beginning that it would be very difficult for us to have the project completed in the spring. The key phrase in the memo is: "We do not want to sacrifice long term quality standards for short term gain." 6. Agenda Item No. 6. Public Forum. There is a possibility there will be speakers in favor of the proposed sewer assessment program. 7. Aizenda Item No. 7A. 2nd Reading Ordinance No. 480-141 (ZA 94-81) Rezoning and Agenda Item No 7B ZA 94-94 Plat Showing of Lot 1 and Lot 2. for a 1.0 acre tract of land located east of S. Peytonville Ave north of W. Continental Blvd. Current zoning is "AG" with a request for "SF-20A." There have been no changes since first reading. I anticipate numerous residents of Southlake Hills appearing for this item because of the failure of the developers of Southlake Hills (Sammy Poe) and Southlake Hills East (Rich Robbins) to satisfactorily respond to homeowner complaints. Although the complaints are unrelated to the specific development before the Council, the homeowners believe there are sufficient questions about the quality of the developers' product to warrant Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest September 2, 1994 fir► Page 4 Council attention. I am attempting to negotiate an agreement between the developers and the neighborhood prior to the meeting. 8. Agenda Item No. 7C. 2nd Reading, Ordinance No. 480-0. amending "C-3" General Commercial District to permit dry cleanin /l�dry facilities with maximum floor area of 4,000 square foot. There have been no changes since Council approval of the 3,500 sq.ft. amendment. Need to make same motion. 9. Agenda Item No. 7K. 2nd Reading Ordinance No. 622, Creating a Building Board of Appf als• Staff will bring back to City Council next meeting a resolution to appoint members to the Board. 10. Agenda Items No. 8A and 8B. 1st Reading, Ordinance No. 480-142 (ZA 94-82). rezoning of"AG" Agricultural with a requested zoning of"SF-1" Single-Family, and ZA 94-83 Preliminary Plat of Lots 1 and 2, E.C. White Addition. Note that these items involve property within the Airport Overlay Zone. Applicant will meet the requirements of our zoning ordinance. Please note also that D/FW Airport, which had originally objected to the proposed zone change and preliminary plat via its August 18 memo to Mayor Fickes, has withdrawn its opposition via its September 1 memo. Following lengthy discussions with the D/FW's attorney, the City attorney, and City staff, the Airport recognizes that the provisions of our agreement are being adhered to by all parties. 11. Agenda Item No. 8C. lst Reading, Ordinance No. 480-136, (ZA 94-86), rezoning request for 11.76 acre tract of land (formerl Thy Acres). Current zoning is "AG" Agricultural with a requested zoning of "I-2" Heavy Industrial District. Please note the P&Z recommendation for denial of ZA 94-86. A super-majority vote of the City Council is required to approve the request. Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest . September 2, 1994 Page 5 12. Aizenda Item No. 8D. 1st Reading, Ordinance No. 480-139 (ZA 94-86) Coventr. This item has become a very emotional issue in the surrounding neighborhoods. There has been considerable rhetoric involving various issues. One thing is factual, notwithstanding the attached letter to Mayor Fickes from Nick McGarity: if the City Council approves the zone change as requested, it will be spot zoning under the Texas Statutes. The Zoning Enabling Act provides that "Zoning regulations must be adopted in accordance with a comprehensive plan..." According to our attorneys, the comprehensive plan referred to is the comprehensive land use plan. The other ordinances which adopted plans, e.g., the Thoroughfare Plan, Park Plan, utility plans, etc., are subordinate to the Land Use Plan and are considered refined elements of the comprehensive plan. If the plan is no longer considered appropriate by the governing body, and spot zoning is to be avoided, then the plan should be changed prior to changing the zoning district that is being considered (which would otherwise be in nonconformity with the existing plan). State Statutes also provides that "...notwithstanding any provisions of a City Charter or an adopted comprehensive plan to the contrary, a majority of the governing body of a municipality may adopt or amend a comprehensive plan at any time." I have heard from a number of folks a question of whether or not the change in the Land Use Plan approved by City Council in June 1993, which changed the designated land use in the area under consideration from moderate to low density, is still appropriate. That is a question for City Council to consider in deciding whether or not the request before you should be granted. If Council believes the change is appropriate, you should perhaps first consider amending/changing the comprehensive land use plan. As mentioned in the letter from Nick McGarity, since November 1992, there have been four (4) instances where City Council has zoned contrary to the Land Use Plan. In each instance, the changes involved situations which appropriately should have resulted in the action taken by City Council. The Myers Meadow change was reflected in the revised Land Use Plan approved by City Council in June 1993. The other three changes will be Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest September 2, 1994 � Page 6 addressed when the Land Use Plan is next revised. (We anticipate bringing the Land Use Plan before P&Z and City Council during this next calendar year to consider these and other potential changes that are the result of our continually evolving community development.) FYI, note the attached memo from Karen Gandy, Zoning Administrator, concerning the rezoning cases mentioned by Mr. McGarity. 13. Agenda Item No. 8E. Resolution No. 94-39, (ZA 94-89). Specific Use Permit for the development of an indoor baseball facility and outdoor fields. Please note in the memo from Karen Gandy the number of petitions signed in opposition to this proposed permit. The bulk of the opposition in the petitions comes from residents in Woodland Heights and along Carlisle Ave. who are concerned about the encroachment of noise and lights into their neighborhood. 14. Agenda Item No. 9A. Resolution No. 94-41, appointment to the Board of Adjustments to fill an unexpired term. The appointment to the BOA will fill the unexpired term of Joe Bentley who resigned his seat on the Board. In a related matter, there will be a training session for the members of the BOA on Wednesday, September 7, to be conducted by our attorney. 15. Agenda Item No. 9B. Resolution No. 94-43, authorizing the City of Southlake to enter into an agreement with the State for the maintenance of the State's Drainage Easement at F.M. 1938 and F.M. 1709. This agreement is analogous to a property owner maintaining a driveway culvert when the culvert is in the City's r.o.w. Some of you will recall that this agreement was reached to enable the entrance to the Albertson Shopping Center off F.M. 1938. In this case, Albertson agreed to pay for the culvert(rather than containing the drainage in the open ditch) and the City agreed to keep the culvert clean of debris. The State would not enter the r.o.w. agreement in any other fashion. 16. Agenda Item No. 10E. Award of bid for Sanitary Sewer System Improvements for N-4 Wal-mart Gravity Spur Force Main and Lift Station. There are problems with this bid Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest September 2, 1994 Page 7 which staff will discuss with City Council in executive session. Ordinarily this type of matter would be addressed on the Consent Agenda, but due to the issue it is more appropriately considered as a regular item. 17. Agenda Item No 10F. Appointing Charter Review Committee Members. This agenda item was discussed with City Council the last two Council meetings. If Council desires to hold a Charter election in January, then the Committee needs to be established and the members appointed. For your review the following has been excerpted from the previous Council memo: City Charter elections are governed by Chapter 9 of the Local Government Code. The City Charter was last amended in January 1991 which, among other things, changed terms of office for the Mayor and Councilmembers to three years, allowed the mayor to vote, and increased councilmembers to six. In the three years since, staff has noticed several areas in which Charter language could be strengthened, or provisions revised to allow for more effective and efficient operation of the City. For example, Section 3.11 of the Charter provides that "...ordinances and resolutions may be passed at any regular meeting or special meeting called for that purpose." (emphasis added) However, Section 3.13 provides that ordinances "...shall be read in open meetings of the City Council on two (2) separate Council meetings which shall be a regular meeting..." There is a conflict in this language, which in effect prevents ordinances from being passed at special meetings. Also, by requiring that the preamble of the ordinance be read before it can be passed, it in effect reasonably prevents even routine ordinances from being placed on the Consent Agenda. If routine ordinances could be placed on the Consent Agenda, and if the preamble could be required to be read only on the second reading (i.e., before passage), meetings could be shortened, perhaps considerably in some instances. Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest September , 1994 Page 8 There are other issues that also might be addressed. For example, a Charter Committee could explore the possibility of including an ethics policy statement for city officials (elected and appointed), regulating conflict of interest. Council may also wish to consider extending the term of office for the Municipal Judge to that of the Mayor and Councilmembers. If you are going to consider the possibility of a charter amendment election, the best time is January 1995. If City Council wants to pursue amending the charter, the Council can decide on its own to submit proposed amendments to the voters or the Council can appoint a Charter Review Committee to make a recommendation to the Council on proposed amendments to present to the voters. It is my recommendation that you appoint an advisory committee consisting of something like the following: • 3 holdovers from the previous Charter Review Committee(perhaps Bruce McCombs, Betty Springer, and Brad Bradley) • 3 newcomers (since the Charter was approved) to Southlake, but who have an interest in being involved(probably from SPIN, e.g., Camille Rasdal, Robin Jones, etc.) • 3 members (one each) from the major Boards and Commissions (e.g., Karen Reynolds (ZBA), Ernest Johnson(P&Z), and Bethann Scratchard (P&R).) This would provide a 9-member committee with a cross-section of the community. Shana Rice and I would serve as ex-officio members to Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest September 2, 1994 Page 9 provide staff support. The above names are not intended to be suggested appointments per se, rather, an indication of the type of makeup of committee. 18. Agenda Item No. 10G. Appointments to CGS Teen Court Advisory Board. The interlocal agreement between the Cities of Colleyville, Grapevine, and Southlake and the Carroll and Grapevine/Colleyville School districts, provides that each participating entity appoint two members to the Advisory Board. It is up to each entity as to the "type" of person appointed. It would be my suggestion that one member of the Advisory Board appointed by Southlake be a Councilmember. OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST 19. SPIN News - There are several items which need to be discussed regarding the SPIN program and neighborhood activities. A summary of these items is presented below: Standing Committee Officers: At its August 25th meeting, the Standing Committee elected officers for one year terms. The officers include Ron Maness, Chair (#11); Pamela Muller, Vice Chair (#8); and June Haney, Secretary (#15). Overview of the August 25th Standing Committee Meeting: Attached you will find the draft minutes from the first business meeting of the Standing Committee. The meeting was productive in the sense that the Standing Committee exhibited a high level of energy and enthusiasm. Our fear of indifference to this program seems, for the moment, unfounded! It appears we may be challenged to keep this group focused, but there certainly seems to be enough interest in program to ensure its success. The group made significant progress during the course of the meeting, and I believe it was a good beginning for them. One of the recommendations to emerge from the discussion at the meeting was that of developing an educational program for SPIN leaders. They all seemed to agree that they need to have information presented to them so that they can more fully Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest September 2, 1994 Page 10 understand the workings of the City. After the meeting, one of the members suggested that we hold a "mini retreat" for the Standing Committee. It is my opinion that this is an idea worth pursuing, and we are so doing. Joint Meeting: The first joint work session between Council and the SPIN Standing Committee has been scheduled for some time for September 29. 1994 at 7:00 p.m. The agenda for this meeting will be jointly developed. If you have an item you wish to include on the agenda, please let Shana know. Paid Advertisements: You have undoubtedly noticed the advertisements that have been running in local papers. As a reminder, a copy of the ad is attached. Ernest Johnson, SPIN Standing Committee representative for Neighborhood #12 has expressed considerable concern over this issue, primarily because the ads did not necessarily reflect the opinions of all residents of the neighborhood but were represented as such in the ad. Nick McGarity has expressed his concern in his letter to Mayor Fickes included herein. The group (individual?) was well within first amendment rights, although the ad is misleading and probably unwise. Also, the logo is not copy protected. We are approaching this issue carefully, given SPIN's infancy and fragility. We will be prepared to discuss this issue with you Tuesday evening. 20. It appears that we are close to a settlement with Mr. Cannedy over the Dove Estates Treatment Plant. This is an issue we will discuss during Executive Session on Tuesday evening. 21. Brock Drive has become the source of controversy during this past week. Apparently, the street division received a call regarding problems with the street and went out to patch it. While there, the crews noticed another area that was about to fail and subsequently patched it. Some neighbors do not like the appearance of the street and the attempted repairs, and are demanding that the street be reconstructed...within two weeks. Staff recognizes that the road needs to be reconstructed, and are currently putting Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest September 2, 1994 Page 11 together the costs for road and sewer improvements. This did not satisfy the gentleman I spoke with about this issue, Al Peters, and each of you may be getting phone calls from him. 22. The rains of the last few days have generated a number of complaints and calls to the Department of Public Safety regarding flooding_ Please see the attached memos from Mike Bedrich and Barry Hinkle regarding Public Safety's response to calls during the inclement weather. Particularly note the incident at Dove Creek in Summerplace. Mrs. Essig intends to be at the Council meeting to complain about the culvert. 23. Tri County Electric - FYI, Tri County has started installing power poles along the south side of F.M. 1709 from Carroll east to the Wal-Mart area. According to Tri County, they were requested to provide service to the site during the construction phase. (TU Electric has the service agreement with Wal-Mart once the store is completed.) Tri County did not notify the City, instead, obtained a permit from the State and began extension of service to the area. I called Tri County and expressed our concern about the continued proliferation of power lines on both sides of the street; they told me they had no choice once service was requested. I reminded Tri County that the State law allows the electric utility companies to utilize any road right-of-way "...with the consent and under the direction of the governing body..." I will be contacting Tri County management Tuesday to further address our concerns. According to our attorneys, we might be able to force Tri County to use the same side as TU Electric. We will discuss this with you later. 24. FYI -- Insurance proposals have been received by our consultant. Eighteen bids have been received, however, some of those are limited in scope (i.e., dental only). We have received several strong bids, including bids from the Texas Municipal League, Blue Cross/Blue Shield, Met Life, Mutual of Omaha, and Harris Hospital. We will be meeting with the consulting firm next week to review their initial analysis. Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest September 2, 1994 , Page 12 25. Concerning the length of the Agenda. There are times when it is difficult for us to keep some items off the agenda. There are things perhaps that Council can do to move the agenda along, however, City Council may decide that given the length of the meeting and the number of items remaining at some particular time (midnight?),the City Council may want to vote to table any remaining items on the agenda to a subsequent meeting. CEH/kb SEP 6 194 12: 15 FROM FLAT DISPLAY PRODUCTS TO PAGE.001 .. Fax Cover Sheet PATE: September 6,IN4 71AE: 11:03 TO.. W.Ctlrtis Hawks PHONE: (817)481-5681 City of Sotddaks,TX. FAX: (817)48"M F John Scoggan PHONE: (214)W&I243 1340 Forest Late FAX (214)9W1256 RE City Council Meeting-w WV04 The City C.omhcil will debate do isms of Mr.David W I14aian's PaVoeed development at tonight's Council meeting. I kww that the its an=the devalogamaat have,bete examely strldtaet. But I believe the develbprow bus merit and should be approved. My position is as follows. 1) I reside in Span 12 and my neigWxdwd,Gross TbW=IDS,heeds to be hoolmd to a amib"sear q9ftCL My Septic tank weft pMdocdy but my neat 4aot neighbor's does not operated dor*g wet aydes. We bave m*dc in cm bar ditch whin his system is not functioning COMXXly. I discussed this with the city a few years back and they were arable to do anything to hehp she.HIS lot will pot support aseptic system duo to the fact that it is basically a large sand atlhod CM*cLaanel that bocoumes sae IsW gxigg daring rainy pedods. 2) 'Ibis deveiopment will fund pert of rho Cost of bdngft this semi o jD our area. Eveshly,the city wjH be forced to Supply sewer to all anus of do city by Me caaaty,state mdkw federal governments. When mat bane ems,it will cost as much less if part of the costs hm been paid by devckWs. 3) The land io gaasttan wr"8 be developed. It will not be 4avokpod with one acre lore. They don't mefoC sense eeouomically. In aUtion,they don't mate a m=esdwtically. ?heir is wddmg attractive about a family restdenm sitting in rho middle of an aae of grass. It lobM a lot lime a wart. Devekp mat Of the property may pot happen at dit time but it doesn't take a crystal bell to we this happening within a year or two. Soutblake is not going to remain rural. I support this project Please forward copies of this FAX to ttmemben ot the Council to that my sappmt can be rmbiezed 14 r 1340 Law TX 81-M !/ ** TOTAL PAGE.001 ** L, City of Southlake August 29, 1994 Mayor: Robert and Kathy Brunson Certified Mail No: PO 9`7 0 3tP41 Gary Fickes 816 Ruth Wall Rd. Mayor ProTem: Grapevine, Texas 76051 Jerry Farrier CoinciLowell and Robbin Jones Certified Mail No: PD I`�harm 6116 N. Central Ex Suite 920 Michael Richarme P�'3' W.Ralph Evans Dallas, Texas 75206 Stephen W.Apple Sr. Jon Michael Franks Andrew L.Wambsganss Mike Allison Certified Mail No: C)VT( g3(�3 City Manager. 5531 Dyer St., Suite 213 Curtis E.Hawk Dallas, Texas 75206 Assistant City Manager: Shane.K.Rice RE: 9.9 acre tract of land in Southlake on F.M. 1709 City Secretary: Sandra L.LeGrand Dear Property Owners: Our Community Development Director Greg Last has made several unsuccessful attempts in the last several months to set up a meeting with each of you to further discuss the City of Southlake's interest in the back portion of your property. The City is still interested in some portion of this property and we would appreciate very much your cooperation in attending a meeting to further discuss opportunities beneficial to all parties. Should a meeting not take place before September 23, 1994, our intentions are to begin the formal process of written offers for acquisition with intentions to condemn should no responses be received. We are willing to meet at any time convenient to all parties. Please contact Kim Bush in my office at ext. 702 to schedule a meeting. I anticipate having the Mayor, myself and Greg Last from the City at the meeting. Please feel free to contact me or Greg should you have any questions. Si cerely, Curtis E. Hawk City Manager CEH/kb c: Gary Fickes, Mayor, City of Southlake Greg Last, Community Development Director 667 North Carroll Avenue •Southlake, Texas 76092 (817) 481-5581 • FAX (817) 488-6796 or Metro (817) 481-0036 AN FnUA1 nppnRTUNITY FMpI nYFR" TEL No . Sep 6 ,94 16=27 No .017 P .02 COMPROMISE AND SE131 MENT AGREEMENT AND RELEASE STATE ON TEXAS § f COUNIT Ole TARRANT THIS AGREEMENT is entered into by and between the City of Sonthlake, Tam (hereinafter referred to as the "City"), and George E. Ciumedy (hereinafter referred to as "Cannedy"). WHEREAS, the City owns and operates a package sewage treatment plant located on Lot 67 of Block 2 of Dove Estates Addition to the City of Southlake and a collector line located in the 5 foot utility easement on Lot 60, pursuant to a written agreement between the City and Dove Estates Joint Venture; and WHMEAS, on March 5, 1991 Cannedy purchased Lots 66 and 67 at a sheriff's tax sale due to taxes becoming delinquent on said lots; and WHEREAS, upon expiration of the two-year statutory right of redemption,Cannedy asserted ownership of the said lots and the package treatment plant thereon as against the City's interest in the lots and ownership interest in the package treatment plant; and WHEREAS, the City caused a lawsuit (the 'lawsuit") to be filed, styled City of Southlake v Geotge E. Cannedy, pending in the 348th Judicial District Court of Tarrant County, Texas as Cause No. 348-154272-94, seeking a declaratory judgment, injunctive relief and other remedies as set forth in the City's pleadings now on file in said lawsuit; and WHEREAS, Cannedy filed a counterclaim in the lawsuit seeldng to quiet title, (VilcAmupiWsltc\cenndly\plcading\scttle.agr(t1R 29-94) TEL No . Sep 6 .94 16 :27 No .017 P.03 seeking a declaratory judgment, damages and other relief against the City; and WHEREAS, bona fide disputes and controversies exist between the parties to this Compromise and Settlement Agreement and Release (this "Agreement"), both as to the fact and extent of liability, if any, and as to the fact and extent of damages, if any, and by reason of such disputes and controversies,the parties to this Agreement desire to settle all claims and causes of action of any kind whatsoever which the parties have now or may have in the future against each other arising out of said disputes and controversies; and WHEREAS,the parties to this Agreement,in order to avoid further conflict and to avoid the costs and uncertainty of litigation, and after having been fully advised of their rights in connection with the aforementioned lawsuit by counsel of their own choosing, without admitting any liability whatsoever,but expressly denying same, are desirous of fully compromising, settling, and forever discharging said claims. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the representations, warranties and agreements contained in this Agreement and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the patties agree as follows: 1. The City will pay all taxes currently due to the City on Lots 66 and 67, (estimated to be $203.00); 2. The City does hereby relinquish any and all claims it may have to Ownership, possession or control of Lot 66, save and except any dedicated easements of record on Lot 66; 3. The City agrees to to Ca pay needy a total of$2,435.00 which represents the cast of the following fees applicable to Lot 66: Sewer Impact Fee ($1,300.00 lmpact Fee ($700,00); water TapFee )� water ($36U.00); Sewer Tap Fee 75.00 . is developed, the P ($ ) when Lot 66 Pe , City retains the right to charge the builder/developer any applicable fv;lee�,vn;w.��,nnodrp�oadl PP le fees wc�a� (Og_") 2 ,�r TEL No . Sep 6 ,94 16 :27 No .017 P .04 at the time the lot is developed, as determined by City ordinances in effect at that time; 4. The City will purchase Lot 67 from Cannedy for the sum of$A500.00 or the fair market value of Lot 67 as determined by an appraiser of the City's choice,whichever is greater, 5. Cannedy does hereby relinquish any and all claims he may have to ownership possession or control of the package sewage treatment plant; 6. Upon execution of this Agreement, each party shall dismiss any and all claims against the other party, with prejudice to the filing or refiling of the same or a similar cause of action in the same or any other court. 7. Cannedy hereby covenants and agrees to release and hold harmless the City from any and all claims for damages to Lot 66 on account of the operation, existence or location of the package treatment plant on Lot 67, including claims for property value diminution, excepting however, claims for damages which may arise in the future for damages to Lot 66 resulting from the negligent or illegal operation of the package treatment plant on Lot 67. The parties hereto release, absolve and discharge each other and their respective officers, agents, servants and employees from any and all claims, demands, liabilities, actions or causes of action which they have or may have,known or unknown, now existing or that might arise hereafter, arising out of or in any manner connected with the lawsuit, and the parties accept the agreements, covenants and payments herein specified in full accord and satisfaction of any and all said claims, demands, liabilities, actions or causes of action. The parties represent and warrant that in making this Agreement they are relying upon their own judgment and the advice of counsel of their own choosing, and are not t:\Bicc\munlwakelcanuedy\pleadina\=Ulwgr(W29-94) 3 '1r✓ TEL No . Sep 6,94 16:27 No .017 P .05 relying upon any statement, representation or advice of any agent, employee or attorney of the other party. All statements contained herein are contractual in nature and not mere recitations of fact. This Agreement shall be binding upon the parties and their respective heirs, successors, assigns and legal representatives forever. This Agreement is being executed in duplicate originals in Tarrant County, Texas on this day of _ 1994. CITY OF SOUTHLAKE Br Curtis R Hawk, City Manager GEORGE E. CANNEDY t;Vilcx%muuiWakr,%MUGWY%PleadMiNO&Alo.W(W29A4) 4 Vw • TEL No . Sep 6 ,94 16:27 No .017 P .06 STATE OF TEXAS § COUNTY OF TARPANT BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, on this day personally appeared Canis A. Hawk, known to me to be the person who executed theeftohrego Compromise and Settlement Agreement and Release, and acknowledgede ger of the City of Southlake, Texas,Plaintiff in the above-referenced lawsuit; that he executed same for the purposes and consideration therein expressed; that he executed same as his free and voluntary act and deed, after having it fully explained to him and after having read it fully and after realizing the effect of the covenants and agreements contained therein, and that the same was executed by him without any force, threat, fraud, duress, or representation of any kind,by any person whomsoever,and that at the time of execution of the Compromise and Settlement Agreement and Release, he was capable of executing this instrument on behalf of the City of Southlake, Texas, and of understanding the significance of his acts. Curtis E. Hawk SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED BEFORE ME by the said Curtis E.Hawk, on this the day of , 1994. Notary Public in and for the State of Texas My C,ommi�.sion Expires: Type or Print Notary's Name f,vikex,nuniWakelamnmy\pwmding\wuici r(w2q p4) 5 INAW ICL IN 0t:JJ 0,7'4 lV •LI 14U .Ulf r .u( STATE OF TEXAS § COUNTY OF TARRANT § BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, on this day personally appeared George a Cannedy, known to me to be the person who executed the f e that ghe is one se and of the Settlement Agreement and Release, and acknowledged to me Defendants in the above-referenced lawsuit; that he executed same for the purposes and consideration therein expressed; that be executed same as his free and voluntary act and deed,after having it fully explained to him and after having read it fully and after realizing the effect of the covenants and agreements contained therein, and that the same was executed by him without any force,threat, fraud, duress, or representation of any kind,by any person whomsoever, and Rel and ease, be was capable ohat at the fte of f executing tn of his instrument ae and nd of Settlement Agreement understanding the significance of his acts. George B. Cannedy SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED BEFORE ME by the said George E. Canncdy, on this the day of_ , 1994. Notary Public in and for the State of Texas My Commission Expires: Type or Print Notary's Name flfile�lmualk[alcelcanaodY�AlcadinE4ettle.air'(og-29-94) 6 fir.' III PIMA SolW PROPERTIES Inc. September 6, 1994 Ms. Karen Gandy Zoning Administrator City of Southlake 667 N. Carroll Ave. Southlake, Texas 76092 RE: ZA94-88 Coventry Dear Ms. Gandy; Please accept this letter as our request to table the captioned zoning action from tonight's Council agenda. Our reasons for requesting this action are: 1) In order to allow our engineer adequate time to complete the changes as requested from the City in their review letter number two which we received last Friday. 2) In order to allow our engineer to complete the new drawings depicting the further reduction of lots and the addition of more open space to the plan. 3) It has come to our attention that there will not be a full council at tonight's meeting. Moreover, there is a possibility that passage may require a super majority vote due to the opposition within 200 feet being greater than 20%. This appears to be in keeping with the existing Council policy of allowing an applicant to table under these circumstances. For these reasons we respectfully request the tabling of this action until September 20, 1994. Sincerely, David C. McMahan Executive Vice President %DW 5655 Lindero Canyon Road Suite 321 Westlake Village. California 91362 818/889-0440 800/633-3458 5215 N. O'Connor Suite 200 Irving. Texas 75039 214 /444-8322 817/329-6996 r U? U) 100 PL CL kA W. 993 lLn CL L t� U7 to ul 3 W UUU�III, 3 U rr y 'D y {JI Ch 11} O O O {JI r C.S y y LA kA M Y' "� _ 8- 8 Ol ;A r r c CITY MANAG_R Nick McGarity dl-z 2050 N. Shady Oaks DriveSouthlake, TX 76092 //Mg September 1, 1994 Hon. Gary Fickes Mayor, City of Southlake 667 N. Carroll Avenue Southlake, TX 76092 RE: ZA 94-88 Rezoning and Development Plan/Coventry Dear Gary: The subject case is on your agenda for consideration on September 6, 1994. As a member of P&Z, I made the motion to approve this zoning request at our meeting on August 18, 1994. That meeting lasted until approximately 2:30am, due in part to large, vocal opposition from various Southlake residents. Since the P&Z meeting, I have attended 2 SPIN 11 meetings (the most recent one was at City Hall Tuesday night) . I have attempted to answer all questions and defended my actions and the ordinances with my neighbors (I reside in SPIN 11) . Although they have been, for (W the most part courteous and considerate to my views, they remain adamant and solidly opposed to this zoning change. SPIN 11 has allied itself with SPIN 12. There are petitions being circulated and flyers being distributed (see attached) . They have indicated that they intend to retain an attorney (the one Monticello used?) and there will be many citizens that will want to speak next Tuesday. I had considered speaking myself but given that I am a member of the City's Planning and Zoning Commission, a letter to you seemed to me to be more appropriate. My intentions with this letter are to alert you and the Council about the issues and to offer my perspectives on each. At the same time, I have some real concerns about the entire SPIN process. They (SPIN 11 and SPIN 12) ran an ad in last Sunday's Grapevine Sun (attached) complete with the City's Logo. I spoke with Ernest Johnson, Neighborhood Representative for SPIN 12, and confirmed that he was not involved with running this ad. These citizens are approaching this issue with a rabid and almost crusade-like vigor. They have, in the process, completely lost sight of what they are fighting against. I would like to believe in the SPIN process, but their focus needs to become more positive. I don't want to see us as a progressive, well-managed City be stopped dead in our tracks. We can "control growth" if that is the desire of the majority -- but we can not and should not halt growth! { 1 Hon. Gary Fickes Page 2 Following are the issues which I believe will be brought up and, for what ever it's worth, my perspective on them: SPOT ZONING The opposition (with the urging of a former Councilwoman) has alleged that this zoning request, if granted, would be "Spot Zoning." I believe that they will bring an attorney to argue this position before the Council. I strongly disagree with their interpretation and am also confident that our competent City Staff, had they thought this to be the case, would have apprised the Commission of same. I would also like to quote from the Southlake Zoning Guide prepared by our City Attorney, E. Allen Taylor, in February, 1992 to support my position. It would be a good idea to have Allen, or another City attorney, at the meeting Tuesday. Our zoning laws require that zoning be "in accordance with the comprehensive plan." As you are aware, the comprehensive plan is more than just a Land Use Plan. It also includes our: o Water System Plan, (, o Sanitary Sewer System Plan, o Storm Drainage Plan, o Park System Plan, and o Thoroughfare Plan We on P&Z analyze all zoning change requests for the degree they conform to our city's comprehensive plan. Additionally, all zoning must "promote the public health, safety, morals, and welfare, and must be reasonable." A key word here is "PLAN!" Our respective comprehensive plans are "not etched in stone and do not bind the City in making zoning decisions." Spot Zoning is clearly not legal! In order to amend our ordinance to rezone an area, a "change of conditions" must be shown. In Texas, spot zoning is "an unacceptable amendatory ordinance that singles out a small tract of land for treatment that differs from that accorded similar surrounding land and violates the comprehensive plan without proof of change of conditions." Let's examine this case to illustrate why it is not Spot Zoning: Hon. Gary Fickes Page 3 LAND USE PLAN There was no Land Use Plan until September, 1988. This property under consideration was designated for Medium Density Residential on the Land Use Plan adopted in 1988. It was changed to Low Density Residential in the June, 1993 update to the plan because the "area is surrounded by Low Density." When the adjoining landowners bought their land, "they had a right to rely upon the classification that existed at the time the purchase was made." That is, before September, 1988 -- no protection provided; from September, 1998 through June, 1993 -- Medium Density (as proposed) ; after June, 1993 Low Density. These latter folks (i.e. , those who essentially bought in the last year) have a legitimate right to be upset and we should take every action necessary to relieve their concerns -- e.g. , larger lots on the perimeter abutting these homeowners, other concessions, etc. PREVIOUS ZONING ACTIONS CONTRARY TO LAND USE PLAN A valid question is: "Has the City ever approved a zoning change request that was contrary to the Land Use Plan?" The answer is "YES" and I offer the following examples (first 3 from SPIN 11 and SPIN 12) , from my experience on P&Z; o Myers Meadow, 143+ acres to PUD -- LUD=Mixed Use & Low Density o Carroll School site on Shady Oaks to CS -- LUD=Medium Density o NE Corner of Shady Oaks & FM 1709 to C2 (1709 frontage) and CS (to North for addition to Bicentennial Park) -- LUD=Medium Density o The Dominion (between portions of Timarron, N of Continental to Lilac Lane) to Medium Density -- LUD=Medium Density (Continental portion) & Low Density (Lilac Lane frontage) PROCESS FOR UPDATING THE LAND USE PLAN I have been on P&Z now for approximately 2 1/2 years. Therefore, I was on P&Z throughout the process of examining all the land in Southlake and updating the Land Use Plan. Throughout the process (which took about a year) , we held numerous Public Hearings. In a lot of situations, we changed the Land Use Designation to match the Zoning in place. In general, with the 1993 Update, we: o reduced the areas designated for Commercial Development on FM 1709, o changed most of the SH 114 corridor to mixed use, o changed a lot of land in the Bear Creek Basin (southern portion of the City/served by sewer) to Medium Density, and o changed a lot of the land in the northern section (areas not served yet by sewer) to Low Density. Hon. Gary Fickes Page 4 This zoning request is essentially for Medium Density in an area designated for Low Density and therefore does not conform to the June, 1993 Land Use Plan. The 2 members on P&Z who voted against this submittal stated that they did so primarily because of this inconsistency. The one member who abstained did so because he felt the issue was too heavy and he was too new to take a stand one way or the other. SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM PLAN Although not recorded in the notes accompanying the Land Use Plan update of 1993, another consideration for changing the Land Use Designation for this parcel from Medium to Low Density was the lack of Sewer. This plan will fund the Sewer through the Higgins Creek basin to the northern border of Cross Timber Hills. This will allow homes in Dove Acres, Hillwood Estates, Cedar Creek Plantation, Trail Creek, Cedar Oaks Estates (and eventually Cross Timber Hills) to connect to sewer. Although sewer for this subdivision will initially be accomplished with an inter-local agreement with IBM/Maguire Thomas, this sewer is in accordance with the comprehensive plan and will be a foundation for and consistent with the implementation of the much-needed North tw sewer line to Southlake. I have heard that we will be forced to lay a sewer main down SH 114 by as early as 1996. At most, this temporary solution will have a 2-year life. In conclusion, this development is consistent with and will contribute to the implementation of the Sanitary Sewer System Plan. STORM DRAINAGE PLAN The Development Plan submitted with this zoning request clearly shows a detention pond (or ponds) in a 10+ acre green space area on the Peytonville side. I share the concerns that will be voiced Tuesday regarding the impact of this development upon the Shady Oaks side. We need to remind the audience that drainage will be addressed in a Final Drainage Study, acceptable to the City, prior to filing the Final Plat -- i.e. , it will be solved but it need not and should not be as a condition for zoning! ! PARK SYSTEM PLAN This development is in the Park Plan's Zone 7 -- which already includes joint-use facilities at Bicentennial Park and additional ones planned for implementation with the Shady Oaks school site. Another consideration in the Park Plan is green space. This development does offer 12+ acres of green space for the recreational needs of its residents complete with a scenic, spring-fed and Hon. Gary Fickes Page 5 aerated lake and jogging trail on Peytonville. This green space is roughly 14% of the land in question (more than the 10 minimum with a PUD) . The park on Peytonville (over 10 acres) serves to soften the transition from the 1-acre homesites in Trail Creek and Cedar Creek Plantation to the West. Additionally, the developer intends to provide 1-acre lots on the West boundary (where abutting Peytonville or owners on Peytonville) and 30,000sf+ lots where abutting owners on Shady Oaks. Given all of these amenities and concessions to neighbors, I feel that this plan supports and complements the Park Plan. THOROUGHFARE PLAN The Thoroughfare Plan calls for: o North Peytonville, from Raven Bend to Dove, to become a Arterial Undivided 4-Lane road with 70' right-of-way. This development will dedicate its 1/2 of the required 70' ROW for Peytonville with Final Platting. o Shady Oaks, for its entire length from FM 1709 to Dove, is designated to be a Minor Collector 2-Lane road with a 60" ROW. I suspect the recently approved school site on Shady Oaks will change the portion from Hi hland to FM 1709 to 4-lane arterial (similar to N. Peytonvilley. The northern portion of Shady Oaks (from Highland to Dove) , bounded by stately specimen trees, probably will not change. o Highland was designated to ultimately be a Arterial undivided 4-Lane road with a 70' ROW, like N. Peytonville, for its entire length from Kimball to Peytonville. We have struggled with recent zoning cases to solve the need for the extension of Highland from Shady Oaks to Peytonville. This subdivision will provide a "logical solution" to the dilemma by providing a Minor Collector (60' 2-Lane undivided) through the middle of it. This is consistent with the currently constructed Highland 2-lane section to the East and appropriate for the safety considerations of this development. INCREASED TRAFFIC ON PEYTONVILLE AND SHADY OAKS It is worth noting that the Thoroughfare Plan, as adopted, assumed that this area would develop as Medium Density. Therefore, all of these roads mentioned above were designed and sized to handle the traffic such development would cause. In summary, this subdivision contributes its fair share in ROW and perimeter road fees towards the ultimate realization of the City's Thoroughfare Plan. Hon. Gary Fickes Page 6 PUBLIC SAFETY, HEALTH, MORALS and WELFARE Last, but not least, lets look at how this development addresses: Public Safety, Health, Morals and Welfare. o With this development, Public Safety vehicles will have an alternative route from Shady Oaks to Peytonville and vice-versa via the connector provided through the subdivision vs. going all the way to Dove or FM 1709. o This subdivision will have sidewalks throughout that will allow its children and some children residing to the West to walk to the new school. There needs to be a traffic light at Highland and Shady Oaks and sidewalks from that intersection South to the school. o The developer intends to provide school bus stop shelters throughout his development to protect children during inclement weather. o This subdivision will have sewers. Septic systems, by their nature, do not work all of the time -- and, I have a hard time thinking of something more "unhealthy." . It would be a travesty to develop this large an area with septic when a sewer solution could be justified. Besides, all further development with septic anywhere adds to that set of homeowners who have a investment in their septic and will be reluctant to abandon that for an incrementally expensive sewer connection in the future -- not a problem when they are sewer all along! o This development is providing a 10+ acre park on Peytonville with a jogging trail. Although private, I suspect anyone will be able to use it since it is located along Peytonville. o This development will connect the existing 6" water line on Shady Oaks to the existing 8" water line on Peytonville with an 8" line. This cross connection will provide redundancy, better assure un-interrupted service to both corridors, and therefore benefit fire safety. This development is clearly favorable in relation to Public Safety, Health and Welfare issues. As previously stated, in order to amend our ordinance to rezone an area, a "change of conditions" must be shown. Clearly, all of the above supports that "change in conditions" litmus test required. There are several other issues that will be raised which you need to be aware of. Some are relevant to zoning. Hon. Gary Fickes Page 7 1.3 KIDS/HOME WILL NOT PAY FOR SCHOOL TAXES The statement has been made that homes built here will average 1.3 kids per home and, given the cost of the homes, the school taxes received from each home will be inadequate to cover the costs for the respective students in Carroll ISD. The--argument goes something like this: o Medium Density: assuming a $300,000 house at $1.62/$100 tax rate (1993) , the math says each home will contribute $4,860.00 o Low Density: assuming a $500,000 house, each would contribute $8,100.00 Therefore, we should develop 1-acre, half million dollar estates versus medium density, $300K homes. I don't know where this argument came from and challenge its validity and sanity to boot. Either case is a lot of money for homeowner to bear -- whether it covers 1.3 kids in a year of school or not. I paid $3,645 (for 2 houses) in school taxes last year and had no kids in Carroll ISD (my son graduated in 1992) . I never covered the cost/student under the above premise when my son was in school here -- but I definitely am now! Gary, I lived in California in the late 70's when Proposition 13 passed and benefited by having my taxes halved immediately and their growth controlled thereafter. Proposition 13 ABSOLUTELY DESTROYED the California Public Education system, then one of the finest in the Nation. Until someone tells me about a better way to fund public education, I have to remain a proponent for Property Taxes for that purpose. I don't have to like it, especially the ramifications of Robin Hood, but -- it beats all other choices by a country mile! ! In summary, I find the aforementioned argument to be somewhat myopic and flawed! There is an old adage in Commercial Real Estate that "commercial development follows rooftops. " This development will put 127 quality homes on the ground (rooftops) . Other surrounding cities would kill for this supposedly unacceptable development which (from the ad) "crowds one hundred twenty seven homes onto small lots! " We are starting to see the much needed quality commercial development with the completion of Southlake Marketplace and the recent approval of WalMart. I look forward to the day where these and other quality commercial development begins to contribute more taxes and offer some relief for us homeowners. Hon. Gary Fickes Page 8 THIS DEVELOPMENT WILL ADVERSELY AFFECT SURROUNDING PROPERTY VALUES There is a belief by many that spoke at SPIN 11, and will no doubt speak at Council, that this development will adversely affect their property values. I do not feel this to be true. This development will primarily compete against all existing PUDs and SF-20 developments in Southlake -- not the established 1-acre developments in close proximity (e.g. , The Garden, Ravenaux, Cedar Creek Plantation, Trail Creek, Cross Timbers, etc. ) . Let's not lose sight that this PUD, with the possible exception of Monticello, offers the lowest density of any PUD we have. It's minimum lot size of 20,000 sf is equivalent to SF-20 zoning. And, most all of its development regulations are equivalent to SF-20 and one (2,700 sf minimum floor space) far exceeds any SF-20 and SF-1 zoning requirement. THIS LAND COULD JUST AS EASILY BE DEVELOPED AS 1-ACRE MINIMUM PER THE LAND USE PLAN Now I have to put on a Realtor's hat! The facts are: o The established 1-acre developments (Cross Timber Hills, Diamond Circle, Mission Hills, Emerald Estates, Harbor Oaks, Quail Creek, etc. ) were all done with 1970's or early 1980's land prices. And these, including the few 1-acre developments currently underway (Stanhope, for example) were and are being developed as 1-acre minimum because sewer was not and still is not available. o With today's land prices and building costs, SF-1 development would result $500,000+ homes. We already have a plethora of these $500,000+ homes sitting on the ground (and have been for over a year in some cases) which have yet to be SOLD. A 80+ lot SF-1 Development would be doomed to fail from the start. o New development within Southlake increases the average market time to sell all pre-owned homes o Market time for Low Density is longer than for Medium Density -- and these Low Density homeowners usually sell at a price far below their asking price. o When I moved here in 1989, you couldn't give away the lots in The Garden. Today, it is almost built out (5 years later for 16 lots is not good) . Ravenaux, down the street, is same vintage as The Garden and has yet to even sell all its lots. The developer for Ravenaux went into Foreclosure. o The last, and only pre-owned, home which sold in The Garden was in November, 1993. Three (3) other homes in The Garden were on the market then. Two (2) of them are still listed and still not sold! Hon. Gary Fickes Page 9 In conclusion: the average price for a home sold in Southlake today is over $250,000 and new and pre-owned homes in PUDs and SF-20 subdivisions sell at higher prices and in shorter amounts of time than do 1-acre homes in established subdivisions. Most new residents want smaller lots -- i.e. , there is a very limited market for 1-acre developments in today's market! SUMMARY The overall reason folks are moving to Southlake is its overall Quality of Life! Quality of Life encompasses, but is not limited to, the best school system, a low crime rate, an expanding park system and our rural atmosphere. Quality of Life is different for different folks. I like the larger acreage (i.e. , 4.5 acres and horses and geese and dogs and cats) -- but not every one else does. Folks that live in 1-acre+ communities define that as a big part of their quality of life. It might be fine for them, but wouldn't suit me. Then there are people who prefer 20,000 sf lots and are opposed to the smaller lots in PUDs. It is worth noting, that there is an equal number who prefer the smaller PUD lots and oppose 20,000 sf and 1-acre lots just as violently. ,r,, I understand that the number one concern with the SPIN croups is to maintain Low Density. Interesting enough, people who live on 10,000 sf lots in Timarron, 12,500 sf lots in Stone Lakes, Myers Meadow, Lonesome Dove and Timber Lakes or 20,000 sf lots in SouthRidge Lakes, Southview, Oak Hill, Chapel Downs, Chimney Hill and Monticello all share this number one concern! How can this be? Obviously, they all have a different concept of Low Density. Given the small lots in the surrounding cities of Grapevine, Keller, North Richland Hills, Bedford, Euless, Hurst (and even Colleyville) , they're all right! It is worth noting that one of the hottest areas in Southlake today is Summer Place. This is an area with 1,800 sf (or smaller) homes on approximately 7,000 sf lots that sell for the upper 90's to low 1001s. This, along with Parra Linda and Trail Lakes in Grapevine (both Carroll schools) and the Manufactured Housing on Dove, White Chapel and East Continental all meet my "Quality of Life" criteria -- i.e. , rural atmosphere, low crime and good schools! Gary, I empathize with you and the Council. For you to approve this development, you would have to do so for the overall benefits to the City of Southlake (sewers, streets, sidewalks, green space, quality homes, health, public safety, welfare, etc. ) And, too do so would appear to be in opposition to the wishes of the majority of those that will speak Tuesday. Hon. Gary Fickes Page 10 That is exactly what I, and the majority of the P&Z, had to do at our August 18th meeting. It wasn't easy then but it was the right choice for Southlake. I hope you and the Council have the courage and conviction to do the same. Please feel free to call me if you have any questions or I can help further. Sincerely, Nick McGarity Attachments � J , 5THIS� I:SY _ U'R4 r r � ty � PRES�E, j4 � 4111*3iR r f�JI NTEG RITYIr #� PLEAS E,=PLAN TO JOIN YOUR NELG HBO RS INx' A SHOW OF SUPPORT AT TUESDAY'S CITY COUNCIL MEETINGI' }, ;WHEN:TUESDAY,.SEPT. B'TH AT 7.30PM PREVIOUS NEIGHBORHOOD SUPPORT 4 Y' GAINED US A`.UNA"NIMOUS DENIAL;OF TH1 P.U.D `PROJECT IWITS FIRST P&Z MEETING. i _ .... LESS THAN HALF THE PREVIOUS,SUPPORT WAS SHOWN AT THE'LAST P&Z MEETING`l YET IT WAS A SUM VOTE WITH 3 IN FAVOR, 2 AGAINST, AND I OBSTAINED. LETS GET,,. o STRONGER AND SHOW THE COUNCIL HOW yi 'SERIOUS WE AREI HELP PRESERVE HE' T QUALITY AND INTEGRITY OF THIS VERY LAST LOW DENSITY NEIGHBORHOOD IN e SOUTHLAKEI THE LAND USE MAP ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL LAST YEAR SHOULD BE ADHERED-TO, OR THERE WILL NEVER BE ,ANOTHER SECTION OF THIS CITY MAINTAINING I+ACRE LOTSI :M i• >X tt;w PER CANNOT.AFFO 'l. 1T IS OBVIOUS ZZ3AT THE DEVEI.— . r - � . �fF�TASLYDG ' 'ONE ACRE SUBDII ON��BEWE .ALTHOU . r rr BONE=IISE 1NH0y�� ALONGORDv +iwY n k urxAt iPgy a(r '/tc'1.� LETS fi0im ORTI'`FOR A P R D , _ ., z riNOT�'DEVFdA ENHANCE"OUR NEIGHBORHOOD WH[CiWIIl.DECRF.E?S VALUE OFOVR T , GFiHOR1i00D AS'A f ,• ' ' .THISISTHETASTsL`OWpENSrtY �, S�� . � fiiGIHO A OOD,JDOT .,. �:' � -MEDIUM DENSl'lY R 7. III=,LAND USE FLAN Il�1 AN ApR,EA DES GNATED Oti fl,• d Y � .'. f. h l3.WE MUSTS UN END A MESSAGETO OUR COCT � # may':US AT LEASTySOME SMALL PORTION OF " t " SOUTFII.AIM REPRESENIINC*Tom-REASONS WE ALL Y - 4= MOVEDOUT HF.ItE IN THE FIRST PLACE!' r!- rSTREETS ARE ALREADY TOO CONGESTED... 4.OUR RURAI x� ~ a, Wl'TH THE ADDI'I'iON OF.THE NEW,SCHOOIS ON SHADY OAKS TRAFFIC WILL INCREASE B 100 CARS PER DAY: IF THIS DLVELOPE1VIErTT._GOES TH_ ROUGHS:Rdff-MANY t`tt t CONSTRUCTION TRUCKS WILL BE ADDED TO THOSE 600 ,. .. CARS AND BUSES FULL OF CH LDREN? - a. THE DEVELOPER HAS STIIL NOT ADDRESSES THE MASSIVE WATER SHED WHICH WIM OCCURTO THE EAST OF THE DEYIIAPEMENT;SURE TO BACK UP THE NATURAL WATERWAY AND CONSISTANTLY FLOOD SECTIONS OF SHADY OAKS AND MANY NEIGHBORS WHO LIVE ON THAT SIDE. 6.THE QUALITY OF FUTURE PHASES OF THIS DEVELOPEMENT FROM TRACTS OF LAND DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO THE.PROPERTY CANNOT BE SECURED. by ZONING P.U.D.,.FURTURE LOT SIZES CAN BE AS SMALL AS 12,500 SQUARE FEET (ZERO LOT UNE). IF WE GIVE IN THIS DLVELOPEMENT,WE ASSURE A LESSER QUALM OF: :. ?N Dove Road Mop r�1 J.we > co o � ro CO RY > • o ro HELP ► THo Southlake Planning and Zoning has approved a Residential "Planned Use Development" that does not meet with our "Land Use Plan". .Property that is agricultural and planned for 1 acre min imu zoning is now approved at 2.18 dwellings per acre by pl nning and zoning. This needs to be stopped! This matter will come before City Council on September 6th. 'OBJECTIVE : ONE ACRE LOTS WHY: Fewer homes mean less traffic Less wear and tear on roads and eliminate the need to widen Peytonville to 4 lanes Less stress of city services Preserve rural atmosphere Less over crowding of schools and slowing of school tax increases (property taxes from a new home do not cover the cost of educating that home. One acre lots can have septic systems. Smaller lots are dependent on outside source to treat effluent at a cost to you. WHAT CAN WE DO: - Write and call Mayor and Council Members let them know your feelings - all of them (see list below) Mayor - Gary Fickes - 481-2898 W. Ralph Evans 481-3759 Jerry Farrier 481-7220 Stephen Apple 481-5490 Jon Michael Franks 430-1414 Michael Richarme488-4863 A. L. Wambsganss 481-4141 - Come to City Council meeting September 6th, 7:30 p.m. Southlake City Hall and voice your opinion. A strong show of force is essential. - Sign petitions to keep lots at 1 acre or larger per the Land Use Plan for Southlake - Call 424-1015 if you need additional information - If you can help us get petitions signed or get the word out call Michael Bustamante at 421-6840 KEEP SOUTHLAKE BEAUTIFUL F AND UNCONGESTED: >+ SHOW YOUR SUPPORT FOR <Y:+ LOW DENSITY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT s< Southlake City Hall September 6th 700 P.M. gThe city council will be voting for final approval of a development�. . ;: p t which crowds one hundred ?' twenty seven homes onto small lots in Southlake. The Land Use Plan for Southlake calls for Low Density Residential in this area - lots 1-acre in `€.. size or larger. Despite 97% citizen opposition at th e August 18, 1994 meeting, 'g g the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of this a. ' project by rezoning the property so, as to fit the h�>v developer's desires. M4 To our knowledge, this is the first time the Land Use Plan will be cast aside and acreage rezoned M., >: for much smaller lots. Approval will set a prece- dent for developers to do this in other. areas of �A ,y... Southlake. Your neighborhood may be next. u V Southlake could become another crowded, congested, y traffic ridden suburb instead of the exclusive, uncongested "place to move to,, that it can remain if high quality, low density developments are < built Wb Higher density housing will stress our school sys- tem. Three families on one-third acre lots con- Qr3`y tribute significantly less school tax per child >fn e:V oy.t:• than one family on a one acre lot. PLEASE ATTEND THE SEPTEMBER 6TH CITY COUNCIL MEET- ING TO VOICE YOUR OPINION IN SUPPORT OF QUALITY LOW DENSITY DEVELOPMENT IN SOUTHLAKE. Paid for by Citizens of SPIN 11 and 12, Southlake V1049.SdA1 For Low Density Development ks City of Southlake,Texas . MEMORANDUM �W September 2, 1994 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Karen P. Gandy, Zoning Administrator SUBJECT: Response to Nick McGarity's 9/1/94 Letter Previous Zoning Actions Contrary to Land Use Plan Listed below are the rezoning cases cited by Mr. McGarity that were approved, but were not in comformance with the Land Use Plan ("LUP"): Myers Meadow -Approved to "R-P.U.D." in November, 1992 under the 1988 LUP which showed Low Density Residential on the northwestern portion of the site, Medium Density Residential on the northeastern portion, and Mixed Use on the southern portion adjacent to F.M. 1709. A "R-P.U.D." request would be in conformance with the LUP if the area were shown as Medium Density Residential. Carroll School on Shady Oaks - Approved to "CS" in August, 1994 under the 1993 LUP which showed Medium Density Residential. A "CS" request would be in conformance with the LUP if the area were shown as Public/Semi-public. NE Corner of Shady Oaks &F.M. 1709 - Approved to "C-2" in May, 1994 under the 1993 LUP which showed Medium Density Residential. A "C-2" request would be in conformance with the LUP if the area were shown as Mixed Use. The Dominion - Approved to "SF-20A" in July, 1993 under the 1993 LUP which showed Medium Density for the southern two-thirds of the site and Low Density for the northern one-third adjacent to Lilac Lane. (The rezoning application was submitted under the 1988 LUP which showed Medium Density Residential and Low Density Residential as noted above.) A "SF-20A" request would be in conformance with the LUP if the area were shown as Medium Density Residential. DRAFT CITY OF SOUTHLAKE SPIN STANDING COIVMTTEE MEETING August 25, 1994 MINUTES Committee Members Present: Camille Rasdal, Martin Schelling, Pamela Muller, Dick Johnston, Carolyn Hobbs, Joe Mast, Ernest Johnson, Scott Martin, Karen Reynolds, Katie Holzgraefe, Ron Maness, Robin Jones, Peter Sporrer. Members Absent: Cara White, Bill Salazar, Betty Springer, Rick Patterson, Wayne Haney, June Haney. Staff Present: City Manager, Curds E. Hawk; Municipal Judge, Brad Bradley; Assistant City Manager, Shana Rice; Administrative Intern, Kathleen Farrell. The meeting was called to order at 7:10 p.m. by Assistant City Manager Shana Rice. Shana opened the meeting by requesting that committee members turn in the completed survey included in the meeting packet. Agenda Item No. 2. Election of Officers. Shana Rice explained the provision of the SPIN ordinance which requires the Standing Committee to elect officers, and directed the group to refer to the job description for each of the officer positions. The committee is required, by ordinance, to elect a Chair, Vice Chair, and Secretary. Nominations were solicited by secret ballot. Names proposed as potential officers were listed, and committee members were asked to select officers from all the names submitted. Final voting was conducted through secret balloting. The following officers were elected: Ron Maness, Chair Pamela Muller, Vice Chair June Haney, Secretary Item No 3 SPIN Standing Committee Articles of Incorporation. Shana Rice told the Committee that she had received some comments and questions regarding the SPIN Articles of Incorporation. She noted that, during the TEAM Focus exercise, the SPIN Standing Committee Meeting Minutes August 25, 1994 Page Two Committee had been informed that Karen Reynolds would be bringing forward proposed changes. Karen Reynolds then presented her ideas for revising the Articles to the Committee. Her suggestions are reflected in the attached marked up copy of the Articles. The issue of the structure and requirements for Neighborhood Councils generated significant discussion. Karen Reynolds articulated her belief that all residents of the neighborhood should be allowed full participation, and that selecting a smaller group to serve as voting representatives within the neighborhood should not be a requirement. Other members of the Committee disagreed. One of the core issues centered around the requirement of a quorum. Many members of the group were concerned that it would be difficult to get neighborhood residents to commit to spending a great deal of time working as a member of a SPIN group, which may make it difficult to get a quorum for every meeting. Karen reiterated that she felt it was important to get people to the meetings, and that it should not make a difference who comes as long as residents of the neighborhood have an opportunity to participate. After much discussion, it was determined that the Standing Committee would be interested in amending the Articles of Incorporation to include a minimum requirement of four residents at each neighborhood meeting, consisting of the Standing Committee representative and/or designee and three residents. The group also discussed the number of meetings which should be required of neighborhoods. Dick Johnston pointed out that the Standing Committee representative could conceivably call a meeting and have no neighbors show up. He suggested that the language read to require a minimum number of called meetings. Shana Rice pointed out that prior approval by Council is required before the Articles can formally be amended. She suggested that each member compile a list of concerns or suggested changes prior to the next meeting, at which time action could be taken. Ultimately it was decided that each Standing Committee representative should submit their comments in writing to Ron Maness by September 3, 1994. Ron agreed to compile a comprehensive list and to disseminate it to the members of the group. Item No. 4. Quarterly Meeting with City Council. The discussion of this item began with deliberation on finalizing the date for the joint meeting with the City Council. Joe Mast and Ernest Johnson expressed an interest in having the dates remain as scheduled, since changing dates could result in their not being able to attend. After some discussion on alternate dates, it was determined that the September 29, 1994 date was the best for holding the joint meeting with the City Council. Discussion then moved to the format of the joint meeting with Council. How does the Standing SPIN Standing Committee Meeting Minutes (W August 25, 1994 Page Three Committee wish to structure the meeting? Members were in agreement that the meeting should be highly structured. The discussion that followed centered on possible agenda items. One suggestion was that the group go around the table and express some of their neighborhood's concerns. Another suggestion was to select two or three issues for discussion, and several were listed as possibilities. This suggestion raised several questions, including what would the group discuss concerning the issues? Several members voiced an interest in conducting research on the issues prior to taking it up with Council. Shana reminded the group that each Council agenda includes an item for SPIN reports, at which time individual neighborhood concerns could be raised. To date, about half of the Standing Committee members have appeared before Council. There was discussion about developing an educational component to Standing Committee meetings. Ron Maness suggested that the meeting be structured so that the Standing Committee could discuss the "game plan", that is, how SPIN is operating and how the Standing Committee wishes to interact with Council. Then some of the neighborhood concerns could be raised, albeit without getting into detailed discussions. Scott Martin believed that the Council should be telling the Standing Committee what they can do based on the neighborhood concerns. Shana Rice pointed out that since the meeting will be a joint meeting, the Mayor will preside over the meeting and have input into the agenda development. At this point in the meeting, there was considerable discussion of the "hot" topics, such as architectural standards control, zoning, etc. Karen Reynolds suggested that an expectations exercise might be useful for the first meeting. Ultimately it was decided that Ron Maness, as Chair of the Committee, would work with staff and the Mayor to develop an agenda, and that Ron would be the primary spokesperson for the Standing Committee during the meeting. Item No. 5. Update on Progress of SPIN Neighborhood Councils. Shana Rice suggested that it would be helpful for Standing Committee members to share information with each other. For example, Committee members could get together and discuss what is working, what isn't, ways to handle problems, etc. She suggested that City staff could organize early morning coffees which would allow Standing Committee members a time to come together for informal information sharing. The group was generally receptive, but expressed concerns about their time constraints. Karen Reynolds suggested that staff could schedule some informal time just prior to regularly scheduled meetings. SPIN Standing Committee Meeting Minutes August 25, 1994 Page Four Item No. 6. Meeting Adjournment. The meeting was adjourned at 10:15 p.m. Ronald Maness, Chair ATTEST: Shana Rice, Assistant City Manager City of Southiake,Texas MEMORANDUM September 2, 1994 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Mike Bedrich, Director, Police Services SUBJECT: Motorist Assist (MIR #413616) Regarding the motorist assist at Dove Creek and Summerplace where a vehicle was reported in high water (MIR #413616), I have reviewed the reports submitted by Sgt. Hinkle and Cpl. McAmis. Cpl. McAmis, the on-scene officer, indicated that it appeared Mr. Lane had taken faulty evasive action to avoid the unknown object and drove into the creek. He also indicated that upon his arrival, the rain was still extremely heavy and the roadway was free of flowing water. The construction of the overpass does seem to be sufficient to move large amounts of water from the roadway area. There are no guard rails at this location and this may be something to look at in the future. I am available for any questions or comments that you might have. rtv- MB/mr cc: Director Billy Campbell wpWemoWotrAsst City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM August 31, 1994 TO: Mike Bedrich, Director, Police Services FROM: Barry Hinkle, Sergeant, Police Services SUBJECT: Motorist Assist As you know, we sustained an inordinate amount of precipitation on Wednesday, August 31, 1994. During the course of the inclement weather, there was flooding throughout the city. At about 1848 hours, Cpl. McAmis was radio dispatched to the 500 block of Dove Creek at Summerplace reference a stranded motorist in high water. On arrival Cpl. McAmis found Brian Lane, 21 y.o.a., standing on city easement near a swollen creek bed. Mr. Lane informed the Corporal that he had been westbound Dove Creek on a pizza delivery in his 1990 Mitsubishi Eclipse. As he neared the creek bed overpass, he noticed high waters rushing over the roadway. Lane, suspecting that the road ' was safe to cross, continued traveling westbound. Lane advised Cpl. McAmis that an unknown object appeared from the left of the roadway. Mr. Lane indicated that he veered right to avoid hitting the object. When Lane took this evasive action he advised that his vehicle was caught in the current and swept off the roadway and into the rushing water of the creek. The vehicle became submerged almost immediately. Mr. Lane advised Cpl. McAmis that he narrowly escaped serious injury as he had to force the car door open to escape. The current of the water drove the vehicle approximately 100 yards north of Dove Creek into the creek bed. It came to rest against what appeared to be a fence. Cpl. McAmis advised that at the time of his arrival the rain was falling at its heaviest; however, Cpl. McAmis indicated that the water was not passing over the roadway. It appeared to Cpl. McAmis that Mr. Lane had taken faulty evasive action to avoid the unknown object and drove off into the creek bed. I personally went to the location after the water had subsided. I noted there was a curb line on both sides of the creek bed overpass. The curb line stands approximately eight inches tall. The curb line is intentionally broken about every five feet to allow water to pass over without causing roadway blockage during heavy rains. There are no guard rails or other indicators. di Attachment (1) cc: Director Billy Campbell City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM August 23, 1994 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Karen P. Gandy, Zoning Administrator SUBJECT: Ordinance No. 480-0 Attached please find a copy of Ordinance No. 480-0 which reduces the requested 4,000 s.f. full service cleaners to a maximum 3,500 s.f. facility in the "C-3" General Business District. The City Council approved this revision during consideration of the First Reading on August 16, 1994. Should you have questions regarding this request, please call me at extension 743. M KPG (W O ANCE NO. 480-0 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 480, AS AMENDED, THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS, BY AUTHORIZING FULL SERVICE CLEANERS, NOT TO EXCEED 4;9691 SQUARE FEET, IN THE "C-3" DISTRICT; PROVIDING THAT THIS ORDINANCE SHALL BE CUMULATIVE OF ALL ORDINANCES; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING A PENALTY; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION IN PAMPHLET FORM; PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION IN THE OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER;AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the ' Southlake, Texas is a ho le city act' er its charter adopted by the electorate pursuant to Article XI, Section 5 of the Texas Constitution and Chapter 9 of the Local Government Code; and WHEREAS, the City has adopted Ordinance No. 480, as amended, as the Zoning Ordinance for the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it is appropriate and in the best (W interest of the City to amend Ordinance No. 480, as amended, to specifically authorize the location of full service cleaners not to exceed 4-,ON square feet in C-3 zoning districts; and WHEREAS, the City Council has given published notice and held public hearings with respect to the amendment of Ordinance No. 480 as required by law; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHI AI E, TEXAS: Section 1 That Section 21.2 of Ordinance No. 480, as amended, is hereby amended by adding a new permitted use number 3 to read as follows and renumbering the remaining uses accordingly: 113. Cleaning, dying and pressing works; laundry and washaterias, providing that the floor area does not exceed 4-,OW 00 square feet for separate or combined uses." f:\files\muni\slake\ordinanc\480-03.rt(08-19-94) Section 2. Cumulative. This ordinance shall be cumulative of all provisions of ordinances of the City, except where the provisions of this ordinance are in direct conflict with the provisions of other ordinances, in which event the conflicting provisions of the other ordinances are hereby repealed. Section 3. Severability. It is hereby declared to be the intention of the City Council that the phrases, clauses, sentences, paragraphs and sections of this ordinance are severable, and if any phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph or section of this ordinance shall be declared unconstitutional by the valid judgment or decree of any court of competent jurisdiction, such unconstitutionality shall not affect any of the remaining phrases, clauses, sentences, paragraphs and sections of this ordinance, since the same would have been enacted by the City Council without the incorporation in this ordinance of any such.unconstitutional phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph or section. Section 4. Penalty. 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 5. Savings. 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, f.\filcs\muni\slake\ordinanc\480-03.r1 (08-19-94) rr 2 �Vr� whether pending in court or not, under such ordinances, same shall not be affected by this ordinance but may be prosecuted until final disposition by the courts. Section 6. Publication in Pamphlet Form. The City Secretary of the City of Southlake is hereby authorized to publish this ordinance in book or pamphlet form for general distribution among the public, and the operative provisions of this ordinance as so published shall be admissible in evidence in all courts without further proof than the production thereof. Section 7. Publication in a Newspaper. 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 thall additionally publish this ordinance in the official City newspaper one time within ten days after passage of this ordinance, as required by Section 3.13 of the Charter of the City of Southlake. Section 8. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and publication as required by law, and it is so ordained. PASSED AND APPROVED ON FIRST READING ON THIS DAY OF 1994. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY f:\files\muni\slake\ordinanc\480-03.rI(08-19-94) 3 1v - I PASSED AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING ON THIS DAY OF 1994. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: City Attorney Date: ADOPTED: EFFECTIVE: f:\files\muni\slake\ordinanc\480-03.r1(08-19-94) 4 9c_S City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM September 2, 1994 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Karen P. Gandy,Zoning Administrator SUBJECT: ZA 94-94 Plat Showing REQUESTED ACTION: Plat Showing of Lot 1 and Lot 2, J. Thornhill No. 1505 Addition, being a 1.0 acre tract of land situated in the J. Thornhill Survey, Abstract No. 1505 LOCATION: Approximately 700 feet North of W. Continental Blvd. on the South side of Northridge Drive, East of Chimney Hill Addition OWNER/APPLICANT: Southlake 11.4 Acre, Inc. CURRENT ZONING: "AG" Agricultural REQUESTED ZONING: "SF-20A" Single-Family Residential District LAND USE CATEGORY: Medium Density Residential NO. NOTICES SENT: Five (5) RESPONSES: No written responses received P&Z ACTION: August 18, 1994; Approved (6-0) ZA 94-94 Plat Showing subject to the Plat Review Summary dated August 12, 1994 modifying item#7 so that the easement may offset into one lot 5 ft. STAFF COMMENTS: The Applicant has met all the review comments of the first Plat Review Summary dated August 12, 1994 with the exception of those items addressed in the attached second Plat Review Summary dated September 2, 1994. U KPG/bls G AW PF\MEMO\CASES\94-94-PS.W PD 16 -1 moll . .frINNER Alp ► 1�a1 W � I MIN ii. -� fin. 1,..0 �, WSW ice:. �: �+■•♦ it� � • '�� ♦ 1►fir • ������ 1 IMBIN r AS glow-s'!en-M.1� z MM) Comm& LN P-1 art 0 ka;Ij T I it �� r"' ■ av �. i TR 10 10.6 AC I TR 2 40 AC fi80 2fi9 SPIN #14 REPRESENTATIVE: CAROLYN HOBBS Sato D. Mills M. McClendon TR lEIA AC 3.78 AC TR 1E 5.0 AC "SF-2011 "SF-20" 332 T A Southlake JV "' 32o J. Bradle TR 1 TR 1A7 �I y i .81 AC / r In TR 1A4 R 70.0 AC "AG" ( 1.21 AC jip TR 1A5 ( l- "AG" {—� 1.0 AC L C. Hancock 1 TR 1A1 1.0 AC , TR 1A3A o' 87 AC 1¢ TR IA6 .29 AC '„TR IA6A .50 AC TIMBERLAKE � TR 1A3 121 TR lA2 . 13 AC a TR SA6 e) "PUD" FRI 1.0 AC I I.-_ .81 AC 1.62 AC TR 1A I� TR 1A9 1.0 AC (' 1 . 10 AC 235 320 310 1t.o 179 200 1 9 43 100 too tat 44 ti 2 8 42 196 15t 204 200 0 3 ADJACENT OWNERS 7 AND ZONING 4 192 1 O 1 I_o�l City of Southlake,Texas PLAT. REVIEW SUMMARY Case No: A 94-94 Review No: Two Date of Review: 09/02/94 Project Name: Plat Showing -Its 1& 2. J. Thornhill No 1505 Addition OWNER/APPLICANT: ENGINEER/SURVEYOR: Southlake 11.4 Ac.,Inc. J.E. Levitt Engineers,Inc. 215 Executive Way, Suite 120 726 Commerce Street, Suite 104 De Soto,TX 75115 Southlake, TX 76092 Phone: Phone: (817)488-3313 Fax: Fax: (817)488-3315 CITY STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE ABOVE REFERENCED PROJECT RECEIVED BY THE CITY ON 08/30/94 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 TOM ELGIN AT 817)481-5581,EXT.753. 1. The owner's dedication should be in the proper format(as per Appendix 2 of Subdivision Ordinance No. 480) and include the correct plat name. 2. Tie down the P.O.B. to a survey comer, previously filed subdivision corner or USGS monument. * All taxes due must be paid prior to filing this plat in the County records. * Original signatures and seals will be required on each blackline mylar prior to filing the plat. Also required are two sets of owner's dedications and notaries (8.5" x I V or 14" paper) with original signatures and seals on each. * Denotes Informational Comment cc: Southlake 11.4 Ac., Inc. J.E. Levitt Engineers, Inc. . � . � ! - • �� | | ! � | ■ (ƒ ||� | ! � §� q�| `|7 �S` "! m� m!• ! || � ` ! ■ - a' |■ k, . | %�; i ! | q| | , i i� hj �I ��• �� _ � ! , 2 . �,| ,� %. ,■� � � �| . . | ' • %-: �� �� ��' � �•�� _• | �( ! ! � ,� � �§ �� :; %h! � 7� � ' � ■| ��i | . 1 ¥ ;p � | . �$ ® �• — | ; , � |■ f� | | | 4| ' # , e , | � �� � ��� , L-------- ---- \ --_--- ------- . r , ZI � /�— � S City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM September 2, 1994 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Karen P. Gandy,Zoning Administrator SUBJECT: ZA 94-81 Rezoning Request/Ordinance No.480-141 REQUESTED ACTION: Rezoning of a 1.0 acre tract of land situated in the James Thornhill Survey, Abstract No. 1505,Tract lEl LOCATION: East of S. Peytonville Ave.,North of W. Continental Blvd. OWNER/APPLICANT: Southlake 11.4 Acre,Inc., Rich Robbins, Agent CURRENT ZONING: "AG" Agricultural REQUESTED ZONING: "SF-20A" Single-Family Residential District LAND USE CATEGORY: Medium Density Residential NO. NOTICES SENT: Five (5) RESPONSES: No written responses received P&Z ACTION: August 4, 1994; Approved(6-0-1) COUNCIL ACTION: August 16, 1994; Approved (7-0) First Reading, Ordinance No. 480-141 Vk KPG/bls G AW PF\MEM0\CAS ES\94-81-Z.W PD q k_ I Now Em 03�. it ;�.. .. �r 7® ` �` Sri �■� �■ ��/1 r -� -�• ,, F TR 10 10.6 AC (W TR 2 40 AC 6" 269 i SPIN #14 REPRESENTATIVE: CAROLYN HOBBS t9t9 D. Mills M. McClendon TR 1E1A 3.78 AC TR iE 5.0 AC "SF-20" "SF-20" I )]x T A Southlake JV 330 azo J. Bradley: TR 1 TR 1A7 �i � TR AC "� TR 1A4 R 70.0 AC.81 I "AG99 I 1.21 AC iAC( TR iA5 "AG" i.0 AC I C. Hancock! TR SAS i.0 AC t TR iA3A o� 87 AC cc TR 1A6 .29 AC TR 1A6A .50 AC TIMBERLAKE TR 1A3 121 TR lA2 ' 13 AC aTR lA8 I "PUD" .81 AC TR 161 1.0 AC - 1.62 AC TR 1A IN TR IA9 1.0 AC �- 1 . 10 AC x)S 329 310 a1.o 179 200 1 9 43 too 160 16t I 44 2 8 _ 42 tsc tst xo. xoo = 7 ADJACENT OWNERS AND ZONING 4 tla '01 CITY OF SOUTHLAKE,TEXAS ORDINANCE NO. 480-141 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 A 1.0 ACRE TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN THE JAMES . THORNHILL SURVEY, ABSTRACT NO. 1505, TRACT lEl, AND MORE FULLY AND COMPLETELY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT "A" FROM "AG" AGRICULTURAL TO "SF-20A" SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, SUBJECT TO THE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS CONTAINED IN THIS ORDINANCE; CORRECTING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP; PRESERVING ALL OTHER PORTIONS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE;DETERMINING THAT THE PUBLIC INTEREST, MORALS AND GENERAL WELFARE DEMAND THE ZONING CHANGES AND AMENDMENTS HEREIN MADE;PROVIDING' THAT THIS ORDINANCE SHALL BE CUMULATIVE OF ALL ORDINANCES; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY FOR VIOLATIONS HEREOF; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION IN THE OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. AS, the Ci of Southlake, Texas is a home rule City acting under its adopted by the electorate pursuan Section 5 of the T,-.Yn 9 of the Texas Local Government Code; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 211 of the Local Government Code, the City has the authority to adopt a comprehensive zoning ordinance and map regulating the location and use of buildings, other structures and land for business, industrial,residential and other purposes, and to amend said ordinance and map for the purpose of promoting the public health, safety, morals and general welfare, all in accordance with a comprehensive plan; and WHEREAS, the hereinafter described property is currently zoned as "AG" Agricultural under the City's Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance; and WHEREAS,a change in the zoning classification of said property was requested by a person or corporation having a proprietary interest in said property; and WHEREAS,,the City Council of the City of Southlake,Texas, at a public hearing called by the City Council did consider the following factors in making a determination as to whether these changes should be granted or denied: safety of the motoring public and the pedestrians using the O10RMZON04M480.141 Page 1 facilities in the area immediately surrounding the sites;safety from fire hazards and damages; noise (tow 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 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: GA0RD\Z0N1NGV&0.141 Page 2 n (W Being a 1.0 acre tract of land situated in the James Thornhill Survey, Abstract No. 1505, Tract 1El, and more fully and completely described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein, from "AG" Agricultural to "SF-20A" Single-Family Residential District. Section 2. That the City Manager is hereby directed to correct the Official Zoning map of the City of Southlake,Texas,to reflect the herein changes in zoning. Section 3. That in all other respects the use of the tract or tracts of land herein above described shall be subject to all the applicable regulations contained in said Zoning Ordinance and all other applicable and pertinent ordinances for the City of Southlake,Texas. All existing sections, subsections,paragraphs, sentences,words,phrases and definitions of said Zoning Ordinance are not amended hereby, but remain intact and are hereby ratified, verified, and affirmed. Section 4. That the zoning regulations and districts as herein established have been made in accordance with the comprehensive plan for the purpose of promoting the health, safety, morals and the general welfare of the community. They have been designed, with respect to both present conditions and the conditions reasonably anticipated to exist in the foreseeable future; to lessen congestion in the streets;to provide adequate light and air; to prevent over-crowding of land; to avoid undue concentration of population;and to facilitate the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewerage, drainage and surface water,parks and other commercial needs and development of the community. They have been made after a full and complete hearing with reasonable consideration among other things of the character of the district and its peculiar suitability for the particular uses and with a view of conserving the value of buildings and encouraging the most appropriate use of land throughout the community. Section 5. That this ordinance shall be cumulative of all other ordinances of the City of Southlake, Texas, affecting zoning and shall not repeal any of the provisions of said ordinances except in those instances where provisions of those ordinances are in direct conflict with the provisions of this ordinance. Section 6. That the terms and provisions of this ordinance shall be deemed to be severable and that if the validity of the zoning affecting any portion of the tract or tracts of land described herein shall be declared to be invalid, the same shall not affect the validity of the zoning of the balance of said tract or tracts of land described herein. Section 7. Any person, firm or corporation who violates, disobeys, omits, neglects or refuses to comply with or who resists the enforcement of any of the provisions of this ordinance shall be fined not more than Two Thousand Dollars ($2,000.00) for each offense. Each day that a violation is permitted to exist shall constitute a separate offense. Section 8. All rights and remedies of the City of Southlake are expressly saved as to any and all violations of the provisions of Ordinance No. 480, as amended, or any other ordinances tw 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 G AORDVON WG\4R0.141 Page 3 �A- U or not, under such ordinances, same shall not be affected by this ordinance but may be prosecuted until final disposition by the courts. Section 9. The City Secretary of the City of Southlake is hereby directed to publish the proposed ordinance or its caption and penalty together with a notice setting out the time and place for a public hearing thereon at least ten(10)days before the second reading of this ordinance, and if this ordinance provides for the imposition of any penalty,fine or forfeiture for any violation of any of its provisions,then the City Secretary shall additionally publish this ordinance in the official City newspaper one time within ten(10)days after passage of this ordinance,as required by Section 3.13 of the Charter of the City of Southlake. Section 10. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and publication as required by law,and it is so ordained. PASSED AND APPROVED on the 1st reading the day of , 1994. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY PASSED AND APPROVED on the 2nd reading the day of , 1994. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY GAORDWNINQ480.141 Page 4 APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: CITY ATTORNEY DATE: ADOPTED: EFFECTIVE: GAORMZONING\480.141 Page 5 n EXHIBIT "A" A tract of land out of the James Thornhill Survey, Abstract No. 1505, Tarrant County, Texas, and being described by metes and bounds as follows: BEGINNING at an existing steel rod by deed. call 659.7 feet North 0 degrees 42" minutes 30 seconds West from the Southeast corner of James Thornhill Survey; THENCE North 89 degrees 59 minutes 30 seconds West with fence line 333.85 feet to an existing steel rod; THENCE North 0 degrees 04 minutes 06 seconds West 130.76 feet to a set steel rod; THENCE North 89 degrees 59 minutes 30 seconds East 332.39 feet to a set steel rod; THENCE;Sputh 0 degrees 42 minutes 30 seconds East-130.77 feet to the_PLACE. _OF UGINNING .and'containing 1:0--acre of land. C:QRD=Nff4W90.141 Page 6 �u —� F City of Southlake,Texas CITY MANAGER i MEMORANDUM September 1, 1994 i TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Kim McAdams, Park Project Manager SUBJECT: City Council - Request to Advertise for Bids Bicentennial Park Expansion Project - Phase I j J.T. Dunkin and Associates, designers for the Bicentennial Park Expansion Project Phase I, are wrapping up the construction documents and are ready to advertise for bids. Staff has reviewed the plans and are ready to move forward with bidding. Below is the proposed schedule of the bidding process for your information. Tuesday, Sept 6 Request to Advertise for Bids. COUNCIL ACTION. Sunday, Sept 11 First Public Notice Advertisement. Sunday, Sept 18 Second Public Notice Advertisement. Wednesday, Sept 21 Pre-bid Conference with contractors. 10:00 am - Community Building - Bicentennial Park Friday, Sept 30 10:00 am - Bids Received - City Secretary - City Hall 10:00 am - Bids Opened - Council Chambers - City Hall Monday, Oct 10 Staff Recommendation for Bid Award. Monday, Oct 17 Consider Award of Bid. SPDC ACTION. Tuesday, Oct 18 Consider Award of Bid. COUNCIL ACTION. K :km 5a, -i City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM August 31, 1994 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Kim McAdams, Park Project Manager SUBJECT: SPDC Project Schedule Concerns from August 15, 1994 Bicentennial Park Expansion Project - Phase I At the SPDC meeting of August 15, there were some questions concerning the current delay in the bid opening date and requests to do all we could to get the ballfields open by March 25, 1995. In visiting with our landscape architects for the project and Greg Last, there were four items that have caused delays to date. 1) Due to rainy weather the soil testing was delayed six weeks because the crews were unable to get on site to collect the samples necessary for the structural engineers. 2) The road alignment off of FM 1709 went through several drafts before the city staff was satisfied with the design. 3) Revisions to the Site Plan as late as June. The Parks & Recreation Board was told during the meeting that the July bid date was not possible. 4) As the City acquired the Truelove Property, the site design went through several changes, adding more soccer fields and then more parking. I have reviewed the project schedule closer to determine if there was any way to have the ballfields ready for the March 25 Opening Day of baseball. I have visited with numerous turf specialists, the Head Groundskeeper for the Texas Rangers, area Park Departments, a general contractor, and our designers. The scope of this project, with the amount of concrete work, mass grading, and building construction, will take on the average 6 to 8 months to complete. Given the time of year that we are undergoing construction, we will have rain, freezing temperatures and holidays to contend with; therefore, a normal project schedule is likely to be extended. I spent two hours with the Head Groundskeeper at The Ballpark in Arlington, Jim Anglea, showing him our project and visiting the Little League Ballpark he now has under construction and seeing the ballfield he built last year in Oak Cliff. He said with the scope of construction proposed we would not be able to open in March and he recommended that the turf not be 5 e--a f played on for one year for the best possible results. He was not pleased with the approach he had to take this year with the turf at the new ballpark and pointed out that the turf was showing the stress it had been under. The City of Grapevine completed a similar project about a third the size of our project last year. They started in November and expected the contractor to be completed by March. It was July before they were completed and they recognized they made a mistake by expecting completion in such a short turn around. It is the collective opinion of the turf, construction and park experts with which I have consulted that the project schedule presented to the SPDC August 15 is more realistic than expecting completion in the Spring. The staff will make every effort to get the construction completed as quickly as possible. Barring no weather or construction delays, it may be possible but not probable to meet the March 25 Opening Day of baseball. We do not want to sacrifice long term quality standards for short term gain. City staff will make arrangements to accommodate the public this next Spring season on existing and temporary facilities for baseball and softball. If you have any questions please call me at 481-5581 ext. 757. aw KM/km Contacts: Eric Trevino, Texas Extension Specialist Ray Payne, Texas Turfgrass Association Jim Anglea, Head Groundskeeper at The Ballpark in Arlington Skip Keller, Colleyville Parks Joe Moore, Grapevine Parks Bob Stoffels, JT Dunkin and Associates Marty Halprin, Dean Construction, General Contractor cc: Shana Rice J� �-3 City of Southlake,Texas i MEMORANDUM September 2, 1994 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Bob Whitehead, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Request to Advertise for Bids for Two Sets of Traffic Signals: North Kimball and F.M. 1709; and North Kimball and S.H. 114. To complete the construction of North Kimball Ave. from Southlake Blvd (F.M. 1709) to S.H. 114, the two intersections with North Kimball at F.M. 1709 and S.H. 114 need to be signalized. During construction of F.M. 1709, staff attempted to have Tx-Dot signalize the intersection at North Kimball. Staff was informed that Tx-Dot will not signalize an intersection that had not been constructed and that a traffic study would need to be conducted to warrant the signals. When Wal-Mart became a reality and requested driveway permits from Tx-Dot, then Tx-Dot insisted that the two intersections be signalized. The City contracted with Barton-Ashman Associates, Inc. to conduct the traffic study and produce the plans and specifications. The study concluded that signals were warranted and Tx- Dot approved the study. Plans and specifications have been completed, submitted to Tx-Dot, and a permit issued by Tx-Dot for the installation of the signals. Staff has negotiated with Wal-Mart to pay for one-half the cost of the signals at North Kimball and F.M. 1709. Tx-Dot has offered the use of any equipment, which can be utilized from the intersection of Short Ave. and S.H. 114. Council may recall that the signals at Short Ave. at S.H. 114 are to be removed at the request of the City to abandon Short Ave. Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the City Manager to advertise and take bids for the installation of two sets of traffic signals on North Kimball at F.M. 1709 and S.H. 114. Please place this on the September 6th agenda for Council authorization. &dj_� BW/sm wpfiles\memos\adsig.kim City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM September 2, 1994 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Bob Whitehead, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Request to Advertise for Bids for 12-Inch Water Line Improvements on Shady Oaks Drive The existing water main on Shady Oaks Drive from Southlake Blvd. (F.M. 1709) to Highland is a 4-inch line. The City's Water Master Plan based upon the Land Use Plan calls for an 8- inch line to be constructed on Shady Oaks Drive, from Southlake Blvd. to Highland. With the location of the proposed school on Shady Oaks, their fire flow requires a 12-inch main instead of the 8-inch main. The City's Five Year Water Capital Improvement Plan showed the improvement to be placed in Shady Oaks in F.Y. 1996. Staff is recommending in the F.Y. 1995 Budget, Capital Projects, that the 12-inch main be constructed with Carroll Independent School District(CISD)paying for the oversizing from an 8-inch to a 12-inch main. The total estimated cost is $130,000 with CISD's share being $30,000. CISD has hired Cheatham and Associates to prepare the plans and specifications for the 12-inch water main. City staff is in the process of reviewing the plans. Because of the construction schedule of the new school, it is important to bid the water main as early as possible. Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the City Manager to advertise and take bids for a 12-inch water main on Shady Oaks Drive. BW/sm Attachment: Map wpfiles\memo\cisd.ad HARBOR 1 OR m J K H BRIAR o HARBOR T o d 0 w a ck: n G — ROANOKE DOVE RD No. 3080) v� cEAST DOVE ST. TR ET y z R o � m MOCKINGBIRD LANE 0 2 R TTANY CT s� O <, y TH PRIMROSE LANE PLANTATION OR < TH + � J Inc.) 1 U C. m YH W 5cr x < Y WZ ZES DRRAVENAUX RAVENAU FOREST LANE S D s 57- W HI N m 8 12 U,1(ENE x `�p i N WEST HIGHLAND STREET J 1 ,,, EAST HIGHLAND S R cl R CUQ I'Lr J g p rn�rh S C kool W J � DOVE CREEK Rq � N = W1 AID CT Q _� ASCOT DR o A o nl �� OURT S qP-.I 0A oPLA ONT gKNEss WILD WOOD LANE z zCMH R 1 R C1♦$N (n ME BR OS LOVING CT h UT COVZ cJ ct a �al C O CHAPEL DOWNS a.o L" C C N L DO DR LAKEW600 DRIVE m GLEN CO AL MISSION AMO DR SOU NEW o o y� `S W A m LOVE HENRY CT W Y pp a SOU m TON 8� CT r CT 0� p9 GREEN OAKS LN SAN SAB W N s OUTH 4 o Z GREGG S S NG S C C , 13 D0. IAMOND glVp o OASIS CTL W � Q�C ✓9C/H CTo z pR o ,1p91 F.M. 1709 WEST SOUTHLAKE BLVD < �y�• NORMANDY DR �^ W r n o EAST SOUTHLAKE BLVD WATERFORD DR O � W --1 Z 2 10 MAYFAI � -'NQ- m BR P T EADOWg nMBERC T C m T 9 �i L E URST z R1CHM�0 t. RMAgDy m D CD Cl PINE COURT EAST d �0 F ODC ST o CT v V w 74 0 m �l m LILAC LANE m W Z W O nl W m O� � A _¢ a < a ILL EST o ti SILVERWOOD CIR <o Z EADOW 0 VWOOD a NORTH �� Z N 1�-� o= HIGHLAND OAKS t City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM CITY MANAGER -3�9 August 31, 1994 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Greg Last, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Revisions to Services Contract for Corridor Studies This item is before Council in order to discuss the expansion of the scope of services involved in the Corridor Study project. Attached you will find a revised scope of services dated 8/l/94 as previously presented to City Council. The original RFP (paragraph 3) notes that it was "not the intent of this RFP nor does the budget provide for extensive urban design detailing of the corridors." The recent increase in citizen interest in aesthetic controls and sensitivity to development related planning has impacted the direction and scope of the Corridor Study. It is apparent to me that we will need to provide additional opportunities for public input and to expand the services required to deal with the areas of interest to the citizens and interested public who have attended the Corridor meetings. I have asked Dennis Wilson to prepare the revised scope of services and a new time line in accordance with what we collectively feel would be the appropriate direction to proceed from this point. I have shown via "clouds" the additional services not included in the original services contract. Note specifically the extended time line and additional public input opportunities. This additional work has a price. Dennis has estimated an additional $15,000 for a total not-to- exceed contract price of$35,000. The main areas of additional work are as follows: - Two additional CAC meetings (A.4 and B.5). - One additional public meeting (B.6). - Additional research and preparation needed to include urban design issues into public meetings and the report(Task B). - Additional graphic illustrations anticipated in the report to describe concepts and requirements. - We intend to graphically add in the previously excluded portion of F.M. 1709 from Carroll to Peytonville. 5 D- i City of Southlake,Texas This is an important project for the City. It is even more important given the current atmosphere of concern in the City and our need to reinforce the fact that we have developed over time a good framework for ensuring quality developments and are making efforts to continue a managed approach to development in Southlake. It would be my recommendation that we approve this revision to the scope of services on an hourly invoice format with a not-to-exceed figure of$35,000 plus direct expenses. Since this project will extend into the 94-95 budget year,it is Staffs recommendation that the 94-95 budget(line item 230, Professional Services) be increased to accommodate the required $15,000 for this contract expansion. Staff is also pursuing other possible sources who have expressed an interest in contributing towards this project. Please place this on the Council agenda as a discussion item. Feel free to contact me should you have any questions on this item. 4-0 GLJbls enc: Revised Service Contract dated 8/1/94 G:\WPF\MEMO\StAFPSVC-REV.WPD Southlake Corridor Plan Scope of Services 1 August 1994 ` Scope of Services for SOUTHLAKE CORRIDOR PLAN (Revised) The Study Includes the entirety of SH 114, FM 1709 and FM 1938 (south of 1709). The emphasis will be on land uses, development standards and urban design treatments along these corridors. Concepts for entry features into the City along these corridors will also be prepared. TASK A. VISION, BACKGROUND AND SITE ANALYSIS The Objective of Task A is to identify issues, develop a vision for the corridors, review background information, meet with City staff, the Advisory Committee and members of the public, and carry out site investigations. The Product of Task A will be a summary of issues and visions from the workshops, an annotated Issues Map identifying issues and opportunities, and a vision statement for the corridors. A.1 Kick-off Workshop with the Corridor Advisory Committee (#1) The Consultant will conduct a Work Session with the Corridor Advisory Committee to— Review the Scope of Service and Time Schedule, • Identify Key Issues and Opportunities which may relate to City Image Land Use Developability Architectural Character Buffering AUG 0 31994 Environment Transportation Utilities • Develop a vision statement for the Corridors. A.2 Review Background Information and Conduct Analysis The Consultant will review background information and plans for. • Transportation system and plans • Land use • Zoning, Signage, Subdivision, Landscape, Trees and other ordinances Parks and recreation • Utilities Environmental features A.3 Site Survey The Consultant Team will conduct a general survey of the corridors to identify outstanding features. The Analysis map will summarize such items as land use, Page 1 of 4 Southlake Corridor Plan Scope of Services 1 August 1994 general building setbacks, buffer conditions, significant topographic features, vegetation, views, key building and transportation issues. A.4 Corridor Advisory Committee Workshop (#2) The major land owners will present concepts and schemes for their properties. A.5 Community Workshop (#1) The Consultant will conduct a Work Session with property owners to— Review the Scope of Service and Time Schedule, • Identify Key Issues and Opportunities • Develop vision statements for the corridors A.6 Corridor Advisory Committee Workshop (#3) The Consultant will conduct a Workshop with the Committee to • Review Site Survey Analysis • Background research • Finalize Vision Statements • Discuss preliminary concepts for the Corridors A.7 Community Workshop (#2) The Consultant will review the following: • Site Analysis • Background research • Finalized Vision Statements • Preliminary concepts for the Corridors TASK B DRAFT CORRIDOR PLANS The Objective of Task B is to develop Corridor Plan Concepts in response to the Advisory Committee and Community comments, background research, and to assemble Draft Corridor Plans that identify a Gear direction for the City in all primary areas of concern. The Product of Task B will be specific Draft Corridor Plans, including • draft plan text, • an overall map identifying individual corridors and land use groups, • a conceptual plan and illustration of entry features for each of three or four entries into the City, • diagrams of residential buffering conditions, • Conceptual typical streetscape plan for each of the three corridors, • Recommendations for conceptual modifications to the Landscape and tree preservation ordinances regarding these corridors, • Draft of the contents for zoning districts for each of the corridors, • access standards or other similar policies as appropriate. B.1 Corridor Plan Concepts Page 2 of 4 b�� Southlake Corridor Plan Scope of Services / 1 August 1994 l The Consultant will develop Concepts for typical solutions to key issues and in response to community comments on key topic areas, which may include: Land Use Architectural Guidelines Site Design Standards Circulation (Vehicular, Pedestrian, Bicycle) Landscape Standards —Traffic Control Concepts Streetsca a 05-h-c—epts Implementation Strategies City Entry Definition B.2 Corridor Advisory Committee Workshop (94) The Consultant will conduct a Workshop on the Corridor Plan Concepts. 13.3 Community Workshop (93) The Consultant will conduct a Community Workshop on the Corridor Plan Concepts, and receive comments. 13.4 Revise Draft Plan The Consultant will revise the draft plan based on comments from the Advisory Committee and the Community Workshop B.5 Corridor Advisory Committee Workshop (95) The Consultant will conduct a Workshop on the Corridor Plan Concepts. 6.6 Community Workshop (#4) The Consultant will conduct a Community Workshop on the Corridor Plan Concepts, and receive comments. 13.7 Planning &Zoning Commission/City Council Joint Work Session This work session would serve to gain valuable input from P&Z and Council, and it would familiarize Council with the Plan. B.8 Finalize Concepts, and Draft Plan Once there is a general consensus on the Corridor Plan Concepts, the Consultant will assemble them into a Draft Plan that would include such items as: • Goals and Objectives • Background • Plan Elements • Proposed revisions to Ordinances • Implementation Strategies and Resources. Page 3 of 4 - 6L)- 5- Southlake Corridor Plan Scope of Services 1 August 1994 TASK C. PUBLIC APPROVAL OF CORRIDOR PLANS The Objective of Task C is to gain Council approval of the Corridor Plan and to finalize the document for publication. The Product of Task C will be adoption of the Corridor Plan and the finalization of a report for publication. CA Planning &Zoning Commission Public Hearing C.2 City Council Public Hearing C.3 Finalize Report and Publish The Consultant will provide the City with 10 bound copies of the final report and 1 unbound copy suitable for reproduction. Computer file disks of the report will also be provided to the City. ASSUMPTIONS The proposed Scope of Services, budget and schedule are based on the following assumptions: (W a. Timely assistance by staff in providing support information, coordinating meetings, and distributing information to committees and organizations. b. The City Engineer will review a preferred Land Use and density scenario (provided by the Consultant) for issues relating to the City's Utility Plan. C. The City will provide aerials and maps of the City showing buildings and additional information they have collected at the appropriate scale. d. City staff will organize all meetings with the Advisory Committee, the public and the City's Planning Commission and City Council. e. The full Consultant Team will be available for all Advisory Committee meetings, and The Consultant Team Leader will attend and conduct all other meetings. f. Conceptual design schemes do not include cost estimates. g. Reports (except the final report)will be supplied to City staff for duplication and distribution, as required for the Committee, the public, the Commission and Council. Ten bound copies and one unbound copy of the final report will be produced by the consultant and delivered to the City. Page 4 of 4 4-, • Q U � rn 'c W lJ_ U � O e- h Q1 U o N � ^ O > v ca z U F� o p - Q CO O y o c © 3 o of U o c� Iz N � W © 90 0 W Z c V z Qa. - s o o Oy o N � > cn�. Z (7 C N �O N t Q OC�C A' Q O O O O� O O O O O� : n- O V O mNv N N UUN V) OC Q=� 0' �4�11 Z � L-• F C ._ � O � � M 3 O v1 N mat U a� N �a C o >U .04 EU E U � . Un.Uco _. QM. oQo 2Q oQ aaoCN Q o coU a.0 YN NV cocoI- Y�-N "tW) 1`0o `0 0 o CO QQQQ Qamao amao aoao QUUU City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM CITY MANAGER 2in August 30, 1994 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Bob Whitehead, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Award of Bid for Street Improvements - Kimball Road S.H. 114 to F.M. 1709 GENERAL INFORMATION North Kimball Ave. from S.H. 114 to Southlake Blvd. (F.M. 1709) is a new street. It is designed as an ultimate six-lane divided roadway. The street is to be built in stages. The fast stage, the current bid for consideration, is the construction of storm drains, curb and gutter on the outside lanes, and the two outside lanes in each direction. The street is to be constructed of concrete. The center will be left as a grassy median. At S.H. 114 and Southlake Blvd, North Kimball will transitionback to two lanes to match the existing two-lane streets across each intersection (see attached schematic). Traffic signals for North Kimball at S.H. 114 and at Southlake Blvd, are being designed and will be bid this fall. City Council approved the contract with Cheatham and Associates to design Kimball Road, S.H. 114 to F.M. 1709, at the February 15th, 1994 Council meeting. Advertisement was published on June 19th and June 20th. Bids were publicly opened and read aloud on July 12th. BID TABULATION See attached bid tabulations prepared by Cheatham and Associates. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS None FUNDING/FISCAL IMPACT The engineer's estimate was $321,000 for construction of this project. Actual low bid was $333,984.94 or an increase of $12,984.94. This increase in costs should be covered in a reduction in the signal costs as Wal-Mart has agreed to pay for one-half of the signal and installation on Southlake Blvd. saving the City around $20,000, which had been budgeted for signalization. Funding for the Kimball Road project will be provided from the Street Divisions, Street Infrastructure account. Sc- I Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager Award of Bid for Street Improvements - Kimball Road August 30, 1994 Page 2. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council award the bid to low bidder J.L. Bertram, Inc. Please place this item on the Council's September 6th, 1994 agenda for their consideration. BW Attachments: Bid Tabulation Sheets Kimball Extension Drawing "MeAmemosWimball.bid ,5C CHEATHAM RECEIVED AND J U L 13 W4 3 CW ASSOCIATES DEPT.of PUBUC WORKS July 13, 1994 Mr. Bob Whitehead, P.E. Director of Public Works City of Southlake 667 N. Carroll Ave. Southlake, TX 76092 Re: Award of Bids for Street Improvements - Kimball Rd. S.H. 114 to F.M. 1709 Job No. 001-220 Dear Mr. Whitehead: Enclosed herewith is the bid tabulation for the subject project. The project was bid on July 12, 1994. As shown, the low bidder was J.L. Bertram, Inc., in the amount of $333,984.94. J.L. Bertram has performed for the City in the past, and has done satisfactory work. Therefore, we recommend that the contract be awarded to the low bidder, J.L. Bertram, Inc. of Arlington, Texas. If you have any questions, please give us a call. Respectfully, Eddie Cheatham, P.E. \sowhlakbcM=.awd Enclosure - Bid Tabulation ENGINEERS - PLANNERS - SURVEYORS A Subsidiary Firm of Southwest Planning and Design, Inc. 1601 E. Lamar Blvd. - Suite 200 - Arlington,Texas 76011 817/548-0696 - Metro 265-8836 - Fax 817/265-8532 5c.- 3 f - 3 q o O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O [Ur f O . 0 0 0 c O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O U A O to G p M 00000 (U0000000000 A* OOOV* tA (� R tz ao mwf- 00000a m000ONOOONOM w (D N O� vt - Of� c7tn (0 -- V Nf- tgctv000wI'- N0r- (DCOWAM e- n : p N IT U) t0 0(A r- to r- .- tT O a M 9 ch(D O N a- 1n a e- to 'A : U �04 - (A 69(D 69 64 t- 69 64 a- (R N 64 .- 69 6% a- (A ti 64 6% 6). 69 69 69 N ti w O i o (A 69 � U . z N N F- O A 0000tntnoaC) C> 0000000 �noo U1 i x tJl pq w OMO) OMOo000o0000000 00 LU _ O i ~ LC toM � � o atonooMI, ov '� °O` o vio0 (�n � 2 33 Z V) S a 1 ' a N N � '- N N c+1 O O O N O co O O O O a 0 0 p 0 a a a 0 0 a 0 rf OOOtnONO00000N0000 OOOe- O �t M c t- I- $ tO v (V 00tti OOOONCu4 ui C) oot- Oss}} M 0 ,., (n h '- 0 c- 0 88o 0 , W h O NtDMOtA to 3 OtA (� � OtD (D � e- N � V(DNIs00tACOMA- Nf- a�- � t+i 'j V u)(7u) O�COtD�. CON ': 6': M� c6 sC .- v O j 0 .n-. i ��69 6%to V) 6!64 69 0')-OW Q9-elkOlt(I!6%69 W.CV) M i co t10 CO I 69 w e- OOOOOOst000000 00 v10oo W OtD W • NOO Ot� lA Otn0o00 (V 0 ( O U OOtn �- r000oOtcroNMc+�ivvOib tvOi 000 � N M n i O O O O N O 0 O a O O O pp O O 0 0 0 0 tp O f� a n d = O O O O O to 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 O O O M t� (D t(� S E- Otn00 ONO � OOOOOOOtA000t� 0 �- m 00 tV TC4 N W 8 0 tl- Mtot- 00 tD (H U b n o O Df � to lT O CO CO 0) h 'T CV) 0 0) (D - ') U)p M oo 00 h V 00 to�v 00 to �to N�t6 0)r-to M s- O a N u)N ti t+1 a V) r- 69 CO 68,61), d!69 • 64 N N 69 69 M i N (V i 69 A ; O (3) co0LON00000000000o t` O . v► N ui O1� MOtn0000a000000000 (no � totn a t-040000N V OcN7M � vt � � O b0 O M � 00 M Go GO tDN N } O O O It O N O O O O O O Op 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 e t Z ! to o. v �` , o001lt000000000OOU) 000otA00 O 1 'z, N Mo�O i I� tANN (OM0000 tC) tn � 0 (VODO (V O (� tA tt O 0 tT i (n ONO O �- � N (OO � NNM V a- M �D (D0 V co I' co 1 ; O .- (D00 v-lv0mM tA00tnt� M (Or- OOOOM .- t p� S iG U N N M ; U O M �t �;�Jjr 613,M9609�eW-- ��� �Nb�N D ! O In N t n M f O O O 0 ,0 O O O O O O O O N O %D O O i (Yid [il j W 00) MCo � .- 0000s1 IA000tD00 NOD 0 W m W O Z i F' V O �' �- (DOOOtn00NN0 > Q i go p ; Z � o � Ncl- (D (DO IT V MM V OO co tD .- 0 � 00 '7NONOOs- � (ODMtn (� (ODMMU., c> MHO dd tiM � � � Mr N � � M �- N � "tN i � i i � Y Z vi >- >-� >- > QQvivititidiitI: U: U: iL: QL: ii (n (nW JJJ J JJJJJ (nW J JJ ~' Z O N �' g Y m W ? F- w w w ai A w co Z -1 O V W W A > ¢ o > Naof F- O CL > o p Q �' m ; z Ooww < z ° X " o LL ¢ c� zc~i aW F- a. U 0 wmg °6mWz0U) � a � � O - Q ; n- JUU DWOwOp � Qi- w � � o cn w < cwi ? Zz =)LL of v� w � Z c0.) � uWZZ W N a4 Q � ZZW (J) Q ,� O � w - zp O O Qia �4 > io ooWM0 2wzwzF- X oZ � � Q ad i w Q ~ QU � Z � N � JH > ODD_ n_ ada � ¢ V W0 W w a- U U U U U U Q = a f' < tL=3 (� ~ Q JZ � W oD: wCi � W O Z � � i 0 Q i � d' UZ (/� � O 0 OZW W � to F- cQ a000 O — ( O .j (1)--- C) x w w � F- Utt_ ww - - - - - a rQ = li+ Q' 0 L 0X5 JJ J JJ 1-- O N a � Y � 0YwUZ06 -- � W 00000 - ow ° LLJ uSz oo i p � � 2 � c0-n � o � 00000 = � UWQ lL t- _ w � _ aoa- w - - - - - F- OwXn}} p lJJ U n � (nao0aitQQ (gou � OO.� NMM V (D �) LLi ~ co � w H z F ' OQ cn wp (V M � tn (D t` tp OO NM � to (D � cn IA O � NM N O O HZ �-- NNNN •� 5C- --4, d O O O O O O O O O U O O O O O O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O H S 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 69 64 64 64 FR 64 ffT 64 64 64 to 64 64 69 d3 64(A 64 62(/} FJ4 64 N 7 O 11. O N 41 W Pq F- C.) = i x a = 0- cn a w o oO0000000000000000000oo 0 0 00000000000000000000000 0 i o o o o 0 o o o o o o 0 o 0 0 o 0 0 0 o 0 o o O H I vs fn 611k v).WA u'!W.vs v3 fR 613. v),v� v► ? O U : A x i � a c' ., oh 's tMnN.� .no Hhto o0, 0 0co0c SM0 0 �- 0GO cNtt(ttoo to 0gvoNo 0FooS S o oNoc) WO00000000a0000toot 00 COOv (O � Ococo � NO(OV) r. corm U) co N o(V v to ti r- 0 64to(o i- (O O CD CO ti NON M 64 v 64 64 64 a aN V!N 69 � 64 C4 rioO�FA V! MN A otnoo o0000000000o000Wn00 W Of� 00 srN000000000000 OONOet Q O >C Z � 0v � 0) C4 00Mtn0i° v %noo CD Go _ eo Py '.I', Q p n. 'V' tt) tD N N Q awQ �- ,� � o � o00000000000000000p000Q 0 : 0 � OOOO OM (OO O(�O- o00s0000000A0 0tt0O0O�00tO0 67 N S 00 NDO00000Dt[ O � q thA M N O MvN 6 k N 64 64 64 644 b0(A 64A6i (A V)z- inr) vM v A0vMGoM (DM 'at -to (0 co N O1= 0 A W o0000000000000000000 -- oo 0000 � (n00000000000000 00 LL1 m : ' O CC : F- U 0 0maO � 0006M000 to, tOoo IT* o 000 F-. : Z O ti N0000 CMOvv0hO O v .- O x Q -' fin. ton MN � (M COM t� J : w U a w Q m c- v: Cm Z oo O00S0O � NO � M to to o ("0)N uti � CD � t � DA (� O O aO M N r N : Y N i Z vi >: 0 >- rQQ (iviu: u: Q �itiu: u tiu: QiiLiii Z T p -iUcn � cntnW WJJJJuJJJJJJ (nLLiJ _I J a Z� Z P Q� Of W .- W Qij m ZJ O UU . q O W Cl) i A Ws o w w > w p aZ LL, > 0 o > Wh- ZJ zF_ J W O a a o � � moww000 � > z LL LL g � � � w (� i= FQ owm2 °� mwz0 (1) a_ Ij O UZf- m (n > Z JW (nWUJ � W W0z w co aG Qw ? W ZZw (n0 °- = j 'ZS0E- WZ ZOQ � OU a Q 002 w (n z Co O = (n a 06 ¢ � E :- UQZwWw _3F_ > Z)cLan. aa_ UQ = WQ Z ? A .a FL � ¢ I- � w (n �- cnn. oU UUUU (n2U U qua : F_- QQ2 pUE- Q JZ � W p � � 2 � � oZW W � _ w w wXv � � vXX � 1— ULLw WJJJJJ � F-CL aw fL' W 0 W (nZ .6F_ � UUUUU o W J Q 7 0 N 7 dF_ YF- u. YF_ X— UZp W Y H (nW [ N W UZ W U (nuJ UQUQQQQQUw � �- W : z W = W 0 U-`—` W - - - - - - U W Q OF F- W W - 0OF- wQ "voaovoiDivl- OF- X } � WV : (`., O 0-' MaOUd � QQ (np (nr-- �- '- NMMv (DUI W1- ih u',3ZO aOl NP z M(D M (V M R tD (D � O O C W � NNNNOFZ V ! QO 5 R$�c-S arATR M'kHWAY 11< R.O.W. H=/!I - 1 � 4•wr 4 Mt I MM I 1 1 � 1 1 I —— fUTUR£R.O.W. HWY 114 ep ' t �k: 1" = 200' t X� E _ � o --------------------- I I ' I � `•, M� ' T T ' ' I 1 ' 1 , 1 ' i City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM September 2, 1994 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Lou Ann Heath, Director of Finance SUBJECT: Audit Firm Recommendation At the first of August, the Finance Department sent Requests for Proposal (RFP) for rofessional audit services to ten accounting firms. The RFP requested a ive-year con rind with fiscal year 1994 the initial contract year. The firms contacted were ose that had requested to be put on the City's bid list for audit services plus the major national firms that service municipal clients in the area. It was hoped that national firms would express an interest in proposing, however, four firms submitted proposals as listed below: FIRM NAME AMOUNT CPat a tiedge Crain & Company, Arlington $14,950 illo, Brown & Hill, L.L.P., Waco $16,900 y & Wagner, Dallas $18,200 eaver & Tidwell, Dallas $18,500 All of the firms submitting proposals met the technical requirements. The following additional criteria were considered in the Staff's evaluation process. 1). Compliance with GFOA standarAc outhlake participates in the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) Certificate oevement award program, and has won this award for its FY90, FY91 and FY92 audits. The FY93 audit is still under GFOA review. These audits are reviewed by GFOA affiliate and associate peer members of the Special Review Committee. Audit firms must be familiar with the program criteria to prepare statements that conform to the requirements. 2). Size of the firm and its reputation in the municipal finance field. Firms with numerous municipal audit clients, especially those with cities that are growing and dynamic, have a broader experience base and familiarity with the issues unique to cities. Southlake's financial complexity will continue over the next several years, and there will be continued interaction with the rating agencies. A firm must have an adequate work force and resources to respond to the City's needs over the next several years. 3. Client references. An interview was conducted with one of the firms, and references were contacted on all. /7 Curtis E. Hawk Audit Firm Recommendation September 2, 1994 page 2 The firms submitting proposals are well qualified, however, Weaver and Tidwell excels in several areas. Weaver and Tidwell represents 15 north central Texas municipalities, as well seven school districts. They are headquartered in Texas, have been in business 40+ years and have a staff of over 80 professionals. The engagement partner, Jerry Gaither, is a member of the GFOA Special Review Committee. The firm served as the City of Southlake's auditor for fiscal years 1989 through 1993. They assisted Southlake in receiving the GFOA Certificate of Achievement. Staff recommends that Weaver and Tidwell be awarded the audit contract for 1994, with the City's option to renew for an additional four years. LAH CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS CALENDAR OF EVENTS Request for Proposal - Professional Auditing Services August/September 1994 DATE DESCRIPTION OF EVENTS August 5 Request for Proposal Issued August 12 and 19 Advertise in official newspaper August 19, 10:00 a.m. Pre-proposal Conference with interested bidders August 26, 2:00 p.m. Request for Proposal due August 29-31 Staff Review, Interviews September 6 Final Recommendation to City Council for award of contract BID LIST Request for Proposal - Professional Auditing Services FIRM FIRM Arthur Anderson Rutledge Crain& Company, PC 777 Main Street, Suite 1100 1601 E. Lamar, Suite 109 Fort Worth, TX 76102 Arlington, TX 76011 Day & Wagner Snow, Garrett & Burchfield Attn: Frank Hinton Attn: Gary D. Snow 4924 Greenville Avenue 8851 Highway 80 West, Suite 210 Dallas, TX 75206 Fort Worth, TX 76116-6040 Deloitte & Touche Weaver & Tidwell Attn: George Scott Attn: Jerry Gaither 801 Cherry Street, Suite 2340 12221 Merit Drive, 19th floor Fort Worth, TX 76102 Dallas, TX 75251 Ernst & Young Attn: Turner Almond 500 Throckmorton, Suite 2200 Fort Worth, TX 76102 KPMG Peat Marwick Attn: Don Spitzer 301 Commerce Street, Suite 2500 Fort Worth, TX 76102 McCaslin & Company, P.C. Attn: Cheryl Hartfield 801 Cherry Street, Suite 1450 Fort Worth, TX 76102 Patillo, Brown & Hill, L.L.P. Attn: James C. Curry, CPA American Plaza 200 West Highway 6, Suite 300 P.O. Box 20725 Waco, TX 76702-0725 �� y > City .of Southlake, Texas REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL FOR PROFESSIONAL AUDITING SERVICES 1993-94 667 North Carroll Avenue Southlake, Texas 76092 (metro) 817-481-5581, extension 716 s C. Work Area, Telephone, Photocopying and Facsimile. . . . . 10 D. Report Preparation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 VI. PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 A. General Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 1. Pre-proposal Conference and On-site Inspections . . . 11 2. Inquiries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 3. Submission of Proposals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 4. Completed Proposals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 B. Technical Proposal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 1. General Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 2. Independence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ':-.13 3. License to Practice in Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 4. Firm Qualifications and Experience . . . . . . . . . 14 5. Partner, Supervisory and Staff Qualifications . . . . . 14 6. Similar Engagements with Other Government Entities . 15 7. Specific Audit Approach. . . . ..... . . . . . . . . 15 8. Identification of Anticipated Potential Audit Problems . 16 9. Report Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 C. Dollar Cost Bid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 1. Total All-Inclusive Maximum Price . . . . . . . . . 16 2. Rates by Partner, Specialist, Supervisory and Staff Level Times Hours Anticipated for Each . . . . . . . . . 17 3. Out-of-pocket Expenses in the Total All-inclusive Maximum Price and Reimbursement Rates . . . . . . 17 4. Rates for Additional Professional Services . . . . . . 17 5. Manner of Payment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 6. Proposed Fee Adjustment Method-Future Contract Years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 VH. EVALUATION PROCEDURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 A. Audit Selection Committee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 B. Review of Proposals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 C. Final Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 D. Right to Reject Proposals. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 ENCLOSURES- ( A. 1993-94 Adopted Budget. B. 1992-93 Comprehensive Annual Financial Statement .5, - 7 9 City of Southlake REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL I. INTRODUCTION A. General Information Time Period. The City of Southlake is requesting proposals from qualified firms of certified public accountants to audit its financial statements for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1994, with the option of auditing its financial statements for each of the four (4) subsequent fiscal years. Auditing Standards. These audits are to be performed in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards and the standards for financial audits set forth in the U.S. General Accounting Office's (GAO) Government Auditing Standards (1988) No Compensation For Proposals. There is no expressed or implied obligation for the City of Southlake to reimburse responding firms for any expenses incurred in preparing proposals in response to this request. Pre-proposal Conference. A Pre-proposal conference for all the firms interested in submitting a proposal will be held at 10:00 a.m. on Friday, August 19, 1994 at the Southlake City Council Chambers, City Hall, 667 North Carroll Avenue, 1/4 mile south of State Highway 114, Southlake, Texas to answer questions about the engagement. After this Pre-proposal conference, any inquiries concerning the request for proposal should be addressed to Lou Ann Heath, Finance Director, 667 North Carroll, Southlake, Texas 76092, (817) 481-5581, extension 716. No minutes will be taken at the Pre-proposal conference and the City is under no obligation to provide specifics discussed at the Pre-proposal conference, but a list of individuals in attendance will be available. Copies and Filing Deadline. To be considered, four (4) copies of a proposal must be received in a sealed envelope by the City Secretary at 667 North Carroll Avenue, Southlake, Texas 76092, by 2:00 p.m. on Friday, August 26, 1994. The City of Southlake reserves the right to reject any or all proposals submitted. Proposals submitted via facsimile transmission and computer transferred copies will not be accepted. The City accepts no responsibility for lost or misdirected proposals. Proposals submitted will be evaluated by the City Staff, primarily Lou Ann Heath, Finance Director, and Curtis Hawk, City Manager. The City Council will review the staff evaluations and make the final decision. 4- ��U II. NATURE OF SERVICES REQUIRED A. Scope of Work to be Performed General Purpose Financial Statements. The City of Southlake desires the auditor to express an opinion on the fair presentation of its general purpose financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles. Comprehensive Annual Financial Report. The City of Southlake also desires the auditor to express an opinion on the fair presentation of its combining and individual fund and account group financial statements and schedules in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles. The auditor is not required to audit the supporting schedules contained in the comprehensive annual financial report. However, the auditor is to provide an "in-relation-to" opinion on the supporting schedules based on the auditing procedures applied during the audit of the general purpose financial statements and the combining and individual fund financial statements and schedules. The auditor is not required to audit the statistical section of the report. Popular Financial Report. The City of Southlake may, during the course of the engagement, issue a popular report which may require technical assistance from the CW auditor. B. Auditing Standards To Be Followed To meet the requirements of this request for proposal, the audit shall be performed in accordance with: generally accepted auditing standards as set forth by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants and the standards for financial audits set forth in the U.S. General Accounting Office's Government Auditing Standards (1988). C. Reports to be Issued Following the completion of the audit of the fiscal year's financial statements, the auditor shall issue: ✓ A report on the fair presentation of the financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles. ✓ A report on the internal control structure based on the auditor's understanding of the control structure and assessment of control risk. ✓ A report on the Southlake Park Development Corporation's sales tax receipts and appropriate expenditures. ✓ A report on compliance with applicable laws and regulations. -3- <54 thereon. The auditor shall be required, if requested by the financial advisor and/or the underwriter, to issue a "consent and citation of expertise" as the auditor and any necessary "comfort letters." The City shall inform the auditors of the publication of the financial statements in which their Auditors' opinion is reproduced. 3. A list of findings and other weaknesses from the City of Southlake's most recent financial statement audit is available upon request. 4. There are no known difficulties anticipated in implementing and complying with the GASB reporting requirements recently mandated by the GASB; however, the City of Southlake will require the auditor's assistance to interpret and comply with all reporting requirements. E. Working Paper Retention and Access to Working Papers All working papers and reports must be retained,`at the auditor's expense, for a minimum of three (3) years, unless the firm is notified in writing by the City of Southlake of the need to extend the retention period. The auditor will be required to make working papers available, upon request, to any party identified by the City of Southlake. Also, the auditors will be required to reproduce and leave with the Finance Director all work-papers necessary to track accounting entries from the trial balance to numbers on the financial statements. III. DESCRIPTION OF THE GOVERNMENT A. Key Contact Persons. Mr. Curtis Hawk, City Manager, 817-481-5581 extension 702. Ms. Lou Ann Heath, CPA, Finance Director, 817-481-5581 extension 716. The auditor's principal contact with the City of Southlake will be Lou Ann Heath, CPA, Finance Director who will coordinate the assistance to be provided by the City of Southlake to the auditor. An organization chart is included in Appendix A. B. Background Information The City of Southlake serves an area of 23 square miles with a population of 10,400 as of January 1, 1994. The City has a $808 million tax base and is issuing about 600 housing permits per year. -5- J,�?-ice' - D. Budgetary Basis of Accounting The City of Southlake prepares its budget on a basis consistent with generally accepted accounting principles. E. Federal and State Financial Assistance During the fiscal year to be audited, the City of Southlake received no federal and state financial assistance requiring special auditing and reporting efforts. F. Pension Plans The City of Southlake participates in the following Texas Municipal Retirement System. The City also participates in two deferred compensation plans. Footnote information can be found in the 1992-93 CAFR and the reporting of pension and deferred compensation information must be reported similarly in the current and future audits. Additional information will be provIded upon request. G. Component Units The City of Southlake is defined, for financial reporting purposes, in conformity with the Governmental Accounting Standards Board's Codification of Governmental Accounting and Financial Reporting Standards, Section 2100. Using these criteria, the only component unit included in the City of Southlake's financial statements is the Southlake Parks Development Corporation which was initiated during the year. H. Joint Ventures The City of Southlake is involved in joint ventures with area cities related to water and wastewater services, some of which require special auditing or reporting efforts other than footnotes in the audited financial statements. I. Magnitude of Finance Operations The Finance Department is headed by Lou Ann Heath, CPA, Finance Director and consists of 10 employees. The principal functions performed and the number of employees assigned to each are as follows: Function Number of Employees Accounting 5 Utility Billing and Collection 3 Municipal Court 2 1-�—// Request for proposal issued August 5, 1994 Pre-proposal conference August 19, 1994 (10:00 a.m.) Due date for proposals August 26, 1994 (2:00 p.m.) B. Notification and Contract Dates Selected firm notified September 2, 1994 Contract date (City Council action) September 6, 1994 C. Date Audit May Commence Interim September 26, 1994 Final Noveitiber 28, 1994 The City of Southlake will have records ready for audit and management personnel available to meet with the firm's personnel as of November 28, 1994. D. The auditor shall provide to the City a recommended schedule for the 1993-94 Fiscal Year Audit. The Finance Director and the auditor will agree to,a mutually acceptable schedule. The schedule should include dates for each of the following: 1. Interim Work 2. Detailed Audit Plan-The auditor shall provide City of Southlake a detailed audit plan and a list of all schedules to be prepared by the City of Southlake. 3. Fieldwork 4. Draft Reports E. Entrance Conferences, Progress Reporting and Exit Conferences. The City and the auditor may schedule periodic conferences during the course of the engagement to discuss various aspects of the work. These conferences may include but are not limited to entrance conferences, progress conferences, and exit conferences. -9- photocopying facilities and facsimile machines subject to the restrictions of Southlake business only and basic recording of usage for auditing purposes. D. Report Preparation Report preparation, editing and printing shall be the responsibility of the auditor. VI. PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS A. General Requirements 1. Pre-proposal Conference and On-site Inspections A conference for firms interested in submitting proposals will be held at Southlake City Hall, 667 N. Carroll Avenue, Southlake, Texas 76092 on Friday, August 19, 1994 at 10:00 a.m. Both verbal and written questions will be accepted during the conference. No minutes of the Pre-proposal conference will be taken or distributed to any firms. A list of firms in attendance will be made available. 2. Inquiries Inquiries concerning the request for proposal and the subject of the request for proposal must be made to: Lou Ann Heath, CPA, Finance Director City of Southlake 667 North Carroll Ave. Southlake, Texas 76092 (Metro) 817-481-5581 extension 716 CONTACT WITH PERSONNEL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE OTHER THAN THE FINANCE DIRECTOR REGARDING THIS REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL MAY BE GROUNDS FOR ELIMINATION FROM THE SELECTION PROCESS. 3. Submission of Proposals The following material is required to be received by Friday, August 26, 1994 for a proposing firm to be considered: -t t- B. Technical Proposal NO DOLLAR AMOUNTS SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL 1. General Requirements The purpose of the Technical Proposal is to demonstrate the qualifications, competence and capacity of the firms seeking to undertake an independent audit of the City of Southlake in conformity with the requirements of this request for proposal As such, the substance of proposals will carry more weight than their form or manner of presentation. The Technkt;al Proposal should demonstrate the qualifications of the firm and of the particular staff to be assigned to this engagement. The Technical Proposal should address all the points outlined in the request for proposal(excluding any cost infonnationwhich should only be included in the dollar cost bid). The Proposal should be prepared simply and economically, providing a straightforward, concise description of the proposer's capabilities to satisfy the requirements of the request for proposal. While additional data may be presented, the following subjects, items Nos. 2 through 9, must be included. They represent the criteria against which the proposal will be evaluated. 2. Independence The firm should provide an affirmative statement that it is independent of the City of Southlake as defined by generally accepted auditing standards/the U.S. General Accounting Office's Government. Auditing Standards (1988). The firm should also list and describe the firm's (or proposed subcontractors') professional relationships involving the City of Southlake for the past five (5) years, together with a statement explaining why such relationships do not constitute a conflict of interest relative to performing the proposed audit. In addition, the firm shall give the City of Southlake written notice of any professional relationships entered into (or in the final selection process) during the period of this agreement. 3. License to Practice in the State of Texas An affirmative statement should be included that the firm and all assigned key professional staff are properly licensed to practice in the State of Texas. -13- Engagement partners, managers, other supervisory staff and specialists may be changed if those personnel leave the firm, are promoted or are assigned to another office. These personnel may also be changed for other reasons with the express prior written permission of the City of Southlake. However, in either case, the City of Southlake retains the right to approve or reject replacements. Consultants and firm specialists mentioned in response to this request for proposal can only be changed with the express prior written permission of the City of Southlake, which retains the right to approve or reject replacements. IN Other audit personnel may be changed at the discretion of the`proposer provided that replacements have substantially the same or better qualifications or experience. 6. Similar Engagements With Other Government Entities For the fium's office that will be assigned responsibility for the audit, list the most significant engagements (maximum - S) performed in the last five years that are similar to the engagement described in this request for proposal. These engagements. should be ranked on the basis of total staff hours. Indicate the scope of work, date, engagement partners, total hours, and the name and telephone number of the principal client contact. 7. Specific Audit Approach The proposal should set forth a work plan, including an explanation of the audit methodology to be followed, to perform the services required in Section II of this request for proposal. In developing the work plan, reference should be made to such sources of information as City of Southlake's budget and related materials, organizational charts, manuals and programs, and financial and other management information systems. Proposers will be required to provide the following information on their audit approach: a. Proposed segmentation of the engagement b. Working statements and schedules to be prepared by the Staff of the City of Southlake. -15- The Dollar Cost Bid should include the following information: a. Name of Firm b. Certification that the person signing the proposal is entitled to represent the firm, empowered to submit the bid, and authorized to sign a contract with the City of Southlake. C. A Total All-Inclusive Maximum Price for the 1993-94 engagement. 2. Rates by Partner, Specialist, Supervisory and Staff Level Times Hours Anticipated for Each 3. Out-of-pocket Expenses Included in the Total All-inclusive Maximum Price and Reimbursement Rates Out-of-pocket expenses for firm personnel (e.g., travel, lodging and subsistence) will be reimbursed at the rates used by the City of Southlake for its employees. All estimated out-of-pocket expenses to be reimbursed should be presented as supplementary information. All expense reimbursements will be charged against the total all-inclusive maximum price submitted by the firm. In addition, a statement must be included in the Dollar Cost Bid stating the firm will accept reimbursement for travel, lodging and subsistence at the prevailing City of Southlake rates for its employees. 4. Rates for Additional Professional Services If it should become necessary for City of Southlake to request the auditor to render any additional services to either supplement the services requested in this RFP or to perform additional work as a result of the specific recommendations included in any report issued on this engagement, then such additional work shall be performed only if set forth in an addendum to the contract between City of Southlake and the firm. Any such additional work agreed to between City of Southlake and the firm shall be performed at the same rates set forth in the schedule of fees and expenses included in the dollar cost bid. -17- ,5A�� 4. Proposed cost as evidenced by billing rates and hours budgeted for each type of position. Although a significant factor, fees charged may not be the dominant factor. The award of any contract will be made to the firm, which in the opinion of the City Manager and Finance Director and as confirmed by the City Council , is best qualified based on the criteria listed above. The City of Southlake reserves the right to retain all proposals submitted and use any idea in a proposal regardless of whether that proposal is selected. C. Final Selection The City Council of the City of Southlake will select a firm based upon the recommendation of the Finance Director and City Manager. It is anticipated that a fum will be selected by September 2, 1994. Following notification of the fore selected, it is expected a contract will be executed between both parties by September 6, 1994. D. Right to Reject Proposals Submission of a proposal indicates acceptance by the firm of the conditions contained in this request for proposal unless clearly and specifically noted in the proposal submitted and confirmed in the contract between the City of Southlake and the firm selected. The City of Southlake reserves the right without prejudice to reject any or all proposals, to waive any irregularities in a proposal which is in the best interest of the City, and to negotiate the terms of the agreement with any auditing firm submitting a proposal. -19- APPENDIX B SCHEDULE OF PROFESSIONAL FEES AND EXPENSES FOR THE AUDIT OF THE 1994 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Standard Quoted Hourly Hourly Hours Rates Rates Total Partners Managers Supervisory staff Staff Other (specify): Out-of-pocket expenses: Meals and lodging g g Transportation Other (specify): Total all-inclusive maximum price for 1993-94 audit -21- WEAVER AND TIDWELL I AFFILIATIONS CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS FORT WORTH OFFICE SUMMIT INTERNATIONAL A REGISTERED LIMITED LIASIL.TT PARTNERSHIP 1500 COMMERCE BUILDING ASSOCIATES,INC. THREE FOR jqr PI.AZA,19TH FLOOR 507 WEST SEVENTH(MEET ASSOCIATEO REGIONAL 12221 MEIIIT Drt[vE FORT WORTH,TEXAS 76102 I CGOUNTING FIRMS DALLAs,TExAs75251-22I6 (617)332-7005 (214)490-1970 FACSIMILE(214)702-8321 August 26, 1994 Ms. Lou Ann Heath, CPA Director of Finance City of Southlake 667 N Carroll Avenue Southlake, Texas 76092 Ms. Heat{, thank you for this opportunity to present our proposal to provide professional audit services for the City of Southlake. IAs the '90s unfold, cities face continually more stringent challenges and demands. The ability to successfully combine vision, practicality and technical expertise is paramount to your growth. Weaver and Tidwell, L.L.P., Certified Public Accountants, has over forty years experience and expertise. Our unique capabilities and qualifications make Weaver and Tidwell ideal as the City's audit firm. We believe very strongly that our experience, reputation, depth of resources and extensive practice concentration in local-municipal government auditing and (W accounting will benefit the City. Weaver and 11dwell meets each of the City's selection criteria: I ✓ Experience auditing Texas cities comparable to Southlake in size ' ✓ Resources: The largest accounting firm headquartered in the state, with a strong reputation for local government audit practice I ✓ Expertise in the Single Audit process ✓ Appreciation of the value of the auditor's management letter to municipal financial management and Council members alike ✓ Capacity to support the City in application to the Government Finance fOfficers Association for the Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting (each city we have assisted in submission for the GFOA award has received the certificate on initial submission) ' ✓ Practice philosophy emphasizing personal service: year-round technical assistance to the City's finance staff on routine matters IL �1�/ Table of Contents Weaver and Tidwell, L.L.P., An Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Meeting the City's Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 The Benefits the Firm Offers the City Mandatory Elements Technical Quality Firm Qualifications and Experience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 I National Reputation Size and Range of Services Standards of Practice Quality Control Firm Strengths and Audit Philosophy The Firm's Strategy for the Future Partner, Manager and Staff Qualifications and Experience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 The Engagement Team for the City of Southlake Additional Staff Staff Assignment and Rotation Similar Engagements with Other Government Entities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Specific Audit Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Scope of Our Engagement Work Plan Timing Engagement Planning Evaluation of Electronic Data Processing Controls Analytical Procedures Evaluating the City's Internal Control Structure Approach in Reporting Laws and Regulations Testing Proposal for Professional Audit Services The City of Southlake, Texas August 26, 1994 Weaver and Tidwell, L.L.P., An Overview The City of Southlake, Texas (the City) will benefit from re-selecting Weaver and Tidwell, Certified Public Accountants (the firm), to perform its annual financial audit for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1994, and the four succeeding years if mutually agreed. A Strong Firm Locally Headquartered in North Texas Weaver and Tidwell is a locally-headquartered firm. Like our neighbors in the North Texas business community, we are concerned about the impact of recessionary forces on the region. The partners of Weaver and Tidwell, and ' many of our staff members, are long-time Texas residents and have a keen interest in our local governments because crucial decisions are being made about the lives we lead and our hopes for the future. Experience and Specialization in Local Government Auditing Our professionals have been serving Texas local governments for four decades with a full range of accounting services. This experience affords us a practical understanding of local government operations, enhancing the efficiency of our audit, providing our expertise and consulting ability to make suggestions and help you initiate change. More is expected of local governments today than ever before - more services, more leadership, more accountability. But since tax dollars are scarce, people ' whose business is local government are being asked to provide public services - even to increase services - with fewer resources. To meet these expectations, local government leaders need sound financial and business advice from experienced professionals. Weaver and Tidwell is a proven performer, offering the resources of a large firm with the personal attention of a smaller one. f In addition to our experience as independent auditors, members of our professional staff are active participants in local government affairs in other capacities. Jerry L. Gaither, a key member of Weaver and Tidwell's engagement team for the City, is a member of the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) Special Review Committee. These commitments of time and energy reflect, in part, the firm's dedication to local government auditing as an important segment of our practice. Proposal for Professional Audit Services Page I The City of Southlake, Texas August 26, 1994 Meeting the City's Criteria Askk This proposal presents the qualifications and capabilities of our local governments audit practice, describes how those attributes translate into benefits for the City and how Weaver and Tidwell fulfills each of the City's requirements at a superior level of accomplishment. The purpose of this proposal is to demonstrate that Weaver and Tidwell has the qualifications, competence and capacity to-perform the work required. Further, this proposal assures the City of the firm's,understanding of the scope of the proposed engagement and the depth of our commitment to perform. The Benefits the Firm Offers the City are: ✓ Extensive governmental financial audit as well as single audit experience ✓ An engagement team staffed with experienced professionals at every level, from audit and engagement partner to staff accountant ✓ An unblemished forty-four year reputation for audit service meeting the highest technical standards ✓ Wide recognition of our work in financial markets ✓ Reports prepared and audit work conducted to the highest professional standards ✓ A philosophy and practice approach assuring year-round service Mandatory Elements ✓ The firm, its partners and staff are independent with respect to this engagement ✓ The firm has no conflict of interest with regard to any other work performed by firm for the City ✓ This proposal adheres to the RFP instructions in every respect ✓ The firm enjoys an outstanding reputation for quality audit work -- our most recent peer review report, dated July 31, 1992, is attached, Exhibit I Proposal for Professional Audit Services Page 3 The City of Southlake, Texas August 26, 1994 ��as - f 1 i . i Meeting the City's Criteria k I Technical Quality ✓ Experience: The firm has significant practice concentration in the area of local government auditing. See the section entitled Similar Engagements with Comparable Entities, following. This list of five is only a representative sample of our practice, which is extensive. ✓ Expertise: The partners leading this engagement include a sixteen year veteran local government auditor and a former member of the AICPA Auditing Standards Board who is also an experienced local government audit professional. See Exhibit II, Resumes, following. ✓ Practice philosophy: The partners and manager for this engagement with the City will be available year-round to support the City's finance and internal audit staff. ✓ Audit approach: This proposal details the firm's plan for the project. See the section entitled Specific Audit Approach, following. ✓ Cost: Our estimate of costs reflects thorough planning, a stable engagement team and the cost efficiencies of a locally-headquartered firm. i I i I i I� 1 i { Proposal for Professional Audit Services Page S Tfie City of Southlake, Texas August 26, 1994 -14 3 - Firm Qualifications and Experience As a result of the depth of our service to government entities, we provide our clients with many services beyond those involved in the traditional audit. Some of the services available to the City are: ✓ Auditing ✓ Accounting ✓ Tax planning and compliance ✓ Employee benefits administration and consulting ✓ Management information systems ✓ Management consulting With a staff of over 80 professionals, we are able to provide you with the experience and attention to detail required. Our professionals are articulate, intelligent and highly trained with diverse backgrounds and skills. Many partners and members of the firm have graduate degrees in accounting, tax, law, business and other related fields. The firm has a strong local government practice with more than 33% of our professionals having experience and training in governmental accounting, auditing and financial reporting. The firm's work plan for the City of Southlake includes the followings Partners Two part time Audit Manager One part time Supervisory Staff One full time `Staff:Accountants One part time All professionals assigned to the engagement will work full and/or part time as required to complete the engagement on a timely basis. Proposal for Professional Audit Services Page 7 The City of Southlake, Texas August 26, 1994 Firm Qualifications and Experience - Firm Strengths and Audit Philosophy The City will benefit from application of Weaver and Tidwell's philosophy of practice to this engagement because that philosophy assures the personal attention of firm irm partners and a higher than average level of experience among staff at all levels of assignment. The distinguishing characteristics of Weaver and Tidwell's audit philosophy are: ■ Development of a staff dedicated to audit practice (with special emphasis in the area of local government auditing) by training our professionals to a heightened level of industry knowledge in local government auditing. ■ Understanding and attention to the City's need for a smooth transition from one audit firm to another. ■ Use of experienced personnel at a range of levels, with continuity among engagement leaders as a critical criterion. ■ Personal interest in the management issues facing the audit client through (W the utilization of the management letter process to identify areas where the client can increase efficiency or accuracy. Continual Emphasis on Specialization in Local Government Auditing The firm's practice management plan includes the continued growth of the local government practice specialization, with continued investment of the resources necessary to assure technical skill development. Resources the firm has committed to and will continue to commit to its local governmental practice are: ■ Focus on expansion of service capabilities in the local government sector. Staff assignment and continued professional education to escalate individual capabilities. Proposal or Professional Audit Services Page 9 Po .f The City of Southlake, Texas August 26, 1994 Partner, Manager and Staff Qualifications and Experience As you know, the team assembled to perform audit service for the City is exceptionally well qualified by experience, training and commitment to local government audit work. For this engagement with the City of Southlake, our philosophy of practice excellence will be implemented by individuals with significant municipal audit experience as members of the engagement team. These professionals will be available to the City staff during the audit and report preparation and in a consulting capacity year-round. The Engagement Team for the City of Southlake Engagement/Audit Partner. Jerry L. Gaither • Certified Public Accountant, Texas • 16 years of local government audit experience • Member, GFOA Special Review Committee • Chairman, Weaver and Tidwell's Local Governments Group Technical Review Partner. Richard A. Jones • Certified Public Accountant, Texas • 20 years of local government audit experience • Past member, AICPA Auditing Standards Board • Director of Audit, Weaver and Tidwell Audit Manager: Douglas G. Furra • Certified Public Accountant, Texas • 10 years local government audit experience • Audit manager, Weaver and Tidwell Senior.Jeffrey P. Weyandt • Certified Public Accountant, Texas • 3 years local government audit experience • Audit senior, Weaver and Tidwell 1 i i` i Proposal for Professional Audit Services Page 11 The City of Southlake, Texas August 26, 1994 similar Engagements with Other Government Entities Weaver and Tidwell's extensive local government experience, of which a representative sample is noted below. Following is a list of five municipal audit engagements the firm currently conducts that are comparable to the work to be performed for the City of Southlake. Two important notes regarding local government practice: ■ A comprehensive list of our current clients is included in the section entitled Additional Information, following. ■ Each municipal government that has sought the coveted Government Finance Officers Association Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting while our client has received the award on first submission. Town of Addison, Texas Mr. Ron Whitehead, City Manager 214/450-7028 Scope: Financial and compliance audit/500 professional hours Engagement partner: Jerry L. Gaither City of Carrollton, Texas Mr. Bob Scott, Director of Finance 214/466-3000 Financial and compliance audit/650 professional hours Engagement partner: Jerry L. Gaither City of DeSoto, Texas Mr. Daniel Crawford Chief Accountant 214/230-3753 Financial and compliance audit/500 professional hours Engagement partner: Jerry L. Gaither I Proposal for Professional Audit Services Page 13 IThe City of Southlake, Texas August 26, 1994 Specific Audit Approach - The fzrm's approach to this engagement will provide the City with the opinion, reports and schedules it requires cost efficiently and with minimum disruption to finance staff. Scope of Our Engagement Audit. We will conduct an audit of the general purpose financial statements of the City, including Southlake Park Development Corporation, for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1994 (and the four years thereafter if mutually agreed) and issue opinions thereon. We will provide an "in-relation-to" report on the combining and individual fund financial statements and supporting schedules based on the audit procedures applied during the audit of the general purpose financial statements. In addition, we will provide an "in-relation-to" report on the City's schedule of federal financial assistance based on the audit procedures applied during the audit of the financial statements. Our audit will be conducted in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards as outlined in the Standards for Audit of Governmental Organizations, Programs and Activities, issued by the U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO) and will be guided by the AICPA audit and accounting guide; Audits of State and Local Government Units. Potential Audit Problems. All potential component units will need to be reevaluated as to inclusion as a part of the reporting entity in accordance with GAB 14 "The Financial Reporting Entity" which is effective for September 30, 1994. If any of these entities are required to be included, it could affect the scope of the engagement. Proposal for Professional Audit Services Page 15 The City of Southlake, Texas August 26, 1994 . i Specific Audit Approach Work Plan Our approach consists of four work phases: Initial engagement planning, interim fieldwork, final fieldwork, and technical review. Following is our initial plan with respect to the allocation of work for team members: Distribution of Audit Engagement Team Time, Hours Per Work Phase Staff Total Partners Manaaer Senior Accountants Planning 20 10 — 10 — Interim work 20 -- — 10 10 Final fieldwork 220 35 25 120 40 Administrative and review 40 30 _ 10 _ Total 300 75 25 150 50 Our threshold objective will be to assure smooth, efficient transition from the City's current audit firm. Timing We understand that the City will have records ready for audit and personnel available to meet with us November 28, 1994. We will schedule our fieldwork to minimize disruption to the City's on-going finance operations, adhering to the following deadlines and participating in conferences as requested: Audit planning. Planning will begin upon engagement. We will provide a detailed audit plan by September 26, 1994. The schedules the City has prepared for us in prior years will be satisfactory. Interim work. To begin September 26, 1994. Final fieldwork. To begin November 28, 1994. Proposal for Professional Audit Services Page 17 The City of Southlake, Texas August 26, 1994 Specific Audit Approach The objective of the review will be to obtain an understanding of: ■ Type of computer equipment, communications network and remote locations ■ Types of software and vendors ■ Organization of data processing department ■ Segregation of duties ■ Access and security ■ Systems documentation and system flowchart, record layouts, operator and user instructions and authorizations ■ Procedures for reviewing, testing and approving systems or programs ■ Hardware controls, input controls, processing controls and output controls Analytical Procedures The firm utilizes analytical procedures extensively in the planning, performance, and review of the engagement through evaluations of inter-relationships of both financial and nonfinancial data. Analytical procedures include: ■ Comparison of financial information with. comparable prior periods giving consideration to known changes (for example, comparison of revenues expenditures/expenses with comparable interim periods and balances for unusual variations). ■ Comparison of actual with anticipated results (for example, comparisons of revenues, expenditures/expenses with budgeted amounts or expected results). ■ Evaluation of relationships among elements of financial information within the period (e.g., receivables in relation to billings, revenues in relation to costs, interrelationship of certain assets to revenues and expenses). ■ Evaluation of financial information with relevant nonfinancial information (e.g., water and sewer billings, receivables and deposits with number of customers, payroll by department and number of employees). The firm utilizes analytical procedures to some degree on most accounts to substantiate or corroborate findings from other substantive procedures. Proposal for Professional Audit Services Page 19 The City of Southlake, Texas August 26, 1994 ���30 Specific Audit Approach Based upon work performed in the first phase of the audit, we will prepare audit programs, perform compliance testing we consider appropriate, and begin substantive testwork prior to the closing of the City's general ledger for the fiscal year. Interim Fieldwork Testing of the specific requirements of the City's major federal financial assistance programs will be performed during interim fieldwork, which will include the following: ■ Compliance testing of internal accounting controls ■ Test for compliance with laws, regulations and other compliance requirements ■ 'Evaluate accounting and administrative controls used in administration of federal financial assistance programs, if any ■ Perform specific testing requirements of major financial assistance programs, if any ■ Review and evaluate the City's data processing activities (W ■ Design detail of audit programs, 'including specific procedures to be applied based on results of compliance tests, significant audit areas identified, and the preliminary estimate of materiality ■ Perform interim substantive testwork and analysis of selected accounts Audit Program The selection of audit procedures and design of audit programs is an exercise of professional judgment on the part of the audit team members, guided by firm policies and our experience. Our audit program for the City will be tailor- made for this engagement; for each individual fund, our program will be based on our compliance tests, our evaluation of internal controls and the relative risk, significant audit areas, and our preliminary estimate of materiality. Proposal for Professional Audit Services Page 21 The City of Southlake, Texas August 26, 1994 Specific Audit Approach Technical Review and Reporting The final phase of the audit will begin as final fieldwork ends. Activities to be completed during the technical review phase of the audit include: ■ Engagement partner reviews all workpapers to ensure compliance with technical standards ■ Technical review of all workpapers by engagement review partner ■ Provide assistance complying with GFOA awards program standards N Draft Comprehensive Annual Financial Report* ■ Conduct conference with City's administration to review financial statements, auditor's opinion, the preliminary management letter comments ■ Issue and deliver CAFR, Single Audit reports and management letter Upon completion of fieldwork, the engagement partner will review the entire engagement, with particular attention to significant audit areas. The report and workpapers will also be reviewed by the engagement team technical review partner. He will review the report as an independent party, with the workpapers available, in order to determine the completeness with which the engagement has been performed. His review will determine whether judgments made by others are reasonable in relation to the supporting data and to generally accepted accounting principles, auditing standards, government auditing standards, and firm policy. Prior to issuing the management letter and compliance reports, we will review the proposed contents with City administration to confirm the accuracy of our comments and discuss implementation considerations. Although a management letter represents our formal presentation of findings and recommendations, we will never hesitate to bring forward important matters as soon as they are discovered. The engagement/audit partner for the engagement, Jerry L. Gaither, is a member of the GFOA Special Review Committee. He will review the City's CAFR to determine compliance with the Certificate of Achievement criteria. Proposal for Professional Audit Services Page 23 The City of Southlake, Texas August 26, 1994 ' CURRENT MUNICIPAL CLIENTS Texas City POP. Contact Yrs Partner Addison• 8,900 Mr. Randy Moravec 3 Jerry Gaither PO Box 144 Director of Finance Addison,Texas 75001 214/450-7000 Azle 8,975 Mr.Bob Horton 6 Richard Jones 613 Southeast Parkway Director of Finance Azle,Texas 76020 817/444-2541 Benbrook* 19,725 Mr.David Ragsdale 2 Richard Jones PO Box 26569 Director of Finance Benbrook,Texas 76126 817/249-3000 Carrollton* 84.750 Mr.Bob Scott 2 Jerry Gaither PO Box 110535 Director of Finance Carrollton,Texas 75011 214/466-3000 Coppell* 18.500 Mr.Allan Johnson 5 Jerry Gaither PO Box 478 Asst.Dir.Finance Coppell,Texas 75019 214/462-0022 Desoto* 31,200 Ms.Karola LeMieux 4 Jerry Gaither PO Box 550 Chief Accountant Desoto,Texas 75115 214/230-3753 Euless* 38,600 Ms. Debra Forte' 1 Richard Jones 201 N.Ector Dr. Director of Fiscal&Human Euless,Texas 76039 Resources 817/685-1414 Frisco 7,200 Mr.George Purfoy 3 Jerry Gaither PO Drawer 1000 City Manager Frisco,Texas 75034 214/377-2161 Grapevine* 32,200 Larry Koonce Initial Jerry Gaither 413 S.Main Street Director of Finance Eng. Grapevine,Texas 76051 817/481-0389 Highland Village* 7,900 Mr.Alan Dickerson 3 Jerry Gaither 948 Highland Village Rd. Director of Finance Highland Village,TX 75067 214/317-2558 Keller* 15,000 Ms. Beverly Queen 4 Richard Jones PO Box 770 Director of Finance Keller,Texas 76244 817/431-1517 Lewisville* 51,450 Joe Barnett Initial Jerry Gaither 1197 W.Main @ Civic Circle Director of Finance Eng. Lewisville,Texas 75029-9002 214/219-3400 Rockwall* 11,000 Mr.Michael Phemister i Jerry Gaither 205 W.Rusk Finance Director Rockwall,Texas 75087 214/771-7000 Saginaw* 8,600 Ms.Nan Stanford 10 Richard Jones PO Drawer Director of Finance Saginaw,Texas 76179 817/2324640 Southlake* 8,000 Ms.LuAnne Heath 5 Jerry Gaither 667 N.Carroll Finance Director Southlake,Texas 76092 817/481-5581 Weatherford* 15,000 Mr. Bill Davis 5 Richard Jones PO Box 255 Finance Director Weatherford,Texas 76086 817/594-5441 •Recipient of the Goveran%aa Officers Finame Amciation Certificate of Achievement for Enellenw in Financial Reportint Conclusion: Evaluation of Our Proposal This proposal demonstrates that the firm meets each of criteria for selection expressed by the City. ✓ Comparable Experience The firm's governmental audit experience. The firm as a whole has extensive experience, as demonstrated by the five comparable engagements, noted at Similar Engagements with Other Government Entities, above. These five engagements represent only a part of our practice, which includes 11 other cities, seven independent school districts and other local government entities, including Tarrant County Junior College District and the Tarrant Appraisal District. Staff members'experience. Firm personnel, as individuals, have extensive experience auditing municipalities and other local governments in the north Texas area, as demonstrated by their qualifications, expressed in their resumes, below. ✓ Depth of Resources As the largest accounting firm headquartered in the state and one with a significant practice concentration in local government auditing, the firm is a superior candidate to meet the requirements and needs of the City with respect to the audit outlined in the Request for Proposal. ✓ Proven Ability to Meet Work Schedules The number and tenure of the firm's local government clients demonstrate the governmental community's confidence in the firm's ability to produce timely work. The firm's philosophical commitment to personal service and the prior experience of individuals assigned to the engagement assure clear, open communication among City staff, the City Council and the firm. Proposal for Professional Audit Services Page 27 '! The City of Southlake, Texas August 26, 1994 Exhibit is Weaver and Tidwell's Most Recent Peer Review Report Following is the report issued by the accounting firm of LeMaster & Daniels, Spokane, Washington, with respect to the review conducted of Weaver and Tidwell's accounting and auditing practice for the year ended March 31, 1992. LeMaster & Daniels'review included local government audit work, as required by the AICPA standards for peer review engagements. I Proposal for Professional Audit Services Page 29 The City of Southlake, Texas August 26, 1994 Jerry L. Gaither Audit Partner, Weaver and Tidwell, L.L.P. Certified Public Accountant, Texas Experience in Public Accounting • 16 years of experience in public accounting • Joined Weaver and Tidwell in 1978; became a partner in 1987 • Chairman, Weaver and Tidwell's Local Governments Group . . • Practice emphasis in accounting and auditing for independent school districts and municipalities, including auditing under OMB A-128 and Yellow Book standards University and Continuing Professional Education • Bachelor of business administration in accounting, Texas Christian University, Fort Worth, Texas (1978) • A total of 84 hours of continuing professional education over the past two years, including 46 hours relating to local government accounting and auditing (see attachment) • Author, "Selecting an Audit Firm for a School District" (Texas Association of School Business Officials TASBO Report, December, 1990) • Author, "Government Auditing Standards 9 and 10", "FASB 87 and 88" and "Overview, ASB Releases (1986)", which are educational programs for technical audiences Professional Activities, Awards and Memberships • Member, Strategic Planning Committee of the Town of Addison, Texas • Member, Charter Review Commission of the Town of Addison, Texas • Associate member, Government Finance Officers Association and member, Special Review Committee • Associate member, Association of School Business Officials and member, Panel of Review • Member, Association of Government Accountants • Member, Texas Society of Certified Public Accountants (TSCPA) • Member, American Institute of Certified Public Accountants • Member, TASBO Accounting and Finance Research Committee • Member, TASBO Accounting and Finance Research Sub-Committee (responding to GASB's preliminary views document on service efforts and accomplishments reporting) Weaver and Tidwell, L.L.P. 12221 Merit Drive, 19th Floor 307 West Seventh Street, Suite 1500 Dallas, Texas 75251 Fort Worth, Texas 76102 214/490-1970 • FAX 214/702-8321 817/332-7905 • FAX 817/429-5936 Richard A. Jones Audit Partner and Director of Audit, Weaver and Tulwell, L.L.P. Certified Public Accountant, Texas Professional Experience • 20 years of audit experience • Responsibility for direction of the firm's audit practice • Audit and engagement partner for local governments throughout north Texas, including independent school districts, municipalities, and other entities • Significant experience in compliance auditing for federal programs • Recent member, American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) Auditing Standards Board (1990 - 1992) University and Continuing Professional Education • Bachelors degrees, science (1970) and accounting (1974), the University of Texas at Arlington • A total of 217 hours of continuing professional education during the past two years, including 142 hours in government accounting and auditing • Currently meets the extended continuing professional education requirement imposed by Generally Accepted Government Auditing Standards Professional Activities, Awards and Memberships • Past Chairman, Accounting and Auditing Curriculum Committee, Texas Society of Certified Public Accountants (TSCPA) • Member, Accounting and Reporting Standards Committee, TSCPA • Recipient of the TSCPA Continuing Professional Education Award • Member, Not For Profit Organizations Task Force, Associated Regional Accounting Firms • Member, Technical Institutes Formula Advisory Committee, Texas Higher Education Board • Member, International Association of School Business Officials • Member, AICPA • Member, TSCPA and its Fort Worth Chapter i Weaver and Tidwell, L.L.P. 12221 Merit Drive, 19th Floor 307 West Seventh Street, Suite 1500 Dallas, Texas 75251 Fort Worth, Texas 76102 214/490-1970 • FAX 214/702-8321 817/332-7905 • FAX 817/429-5936 ��&;7 Douglas G. Furra rift Audit Manager, Weaver and Tidwell Certified Public Accountant, Texas Professional Experience • Ten years experience in public accounting, with significant practice experience planning, supervising and managing engagements • Experience as audit manager, senior and accountant for numerous municipalities and independent school districts • Manager of audit engagements for clients in a range of for-profit industries University and Continuing Professional Education • Bachelor of business administration in accounting, Sam Houston State University (1984) • A total of 83 hours of continuing professional education during the past two years, including 38 hours in government accounting and auditing • Currently meets the extended continuing professional education requirement imposed by Generally Accepted Government Auditing Standards Professional Activities and Memberships • Member, Texas Society of Certified Public Accountants and its Dallas Chapter • Member, American Institute of Certified Public Accountants Continuing Professional Education Relating to Government Accounting and Auditing Partial List of Applicable Course Work, January 1, 19913, through December 31, 1993 • Audit Supervisor Staff Training (Associated Regional Accounting Firms) • University and College Financial Reporting (Austin College) • Government Accounting and Auditing Update,(TSCPA) • Advanced Texas School District Auditing (TSCPA) Weaver and Tidwell, L.L.P. 12221 Merit Drive, 19th Floor 307 West Seventh Street, Suite 1500 Dallas, Texas 75251 Fort Worth, Texas 76102 214/490-1970 . FAX 214/702-8321 817/332-7905 • FAX 817/429-5936 e. a Proposal to Perform Professional Audit Services for The City of Southlake, Texas DOLLAR COST BID Weaver and Tidwell, L.L.P. Certified Public Accountants Contact: Mr. Jerry L Gaither Partner, Weaver and Tidwell, LLP. Three Forest Plaza, 19th Floor 12221 Merit Drive Dallas, Texas 75251 Telephone 214/490-1970 Fax 214/702-8321 Submitted August 26, 1994 Dollar Cost Bid Oak Following is a schedule of the f:rm's estimate of professional fees and expenses for the audit of the financial statements as of and for the year ending September 30, 1994. Weaver and Tidwell, L.L.P., Certified Public Accountants (the firm) bases fees for professional services on the time required by professional staff members to perform the engagement. For this engagement with the City of Southlake, Texas, the firm will charge an additional amount for out-of-pocket costs incurred in printing 50 copies of the City's CAFR. We estimate this cost will approximate $500. Schedule of Professional Fees and Expenses for Audit of the City's 1994 Financial Statements Estimate Standard Quoted Staff Level of Hours Hourly Rates Hourly Rates Total Partners 75 $ 125 $ 100 $ 7,500 Manager 25 80 70 1,750 Supervisory Staff 150 45 45 6,750 Staff Accountants 50 40 40 2,000 Estimated Out-of-Pocket Costs _ 500 Total 300 18,500 Proposed Subsequent Year Fees Our objective regarding our relationship with the City is to provide quality services at cost-effective rates. Assuming no substantial change in the scope of our engagement or substantial increase in size or complexity of the City's operations, our fees will be subject only to increase costs created by inflation. Those adjustments will be no more than the increase in regional consumer price index, as reported by the US Bureau of Labor Statistics for Dallas/Fort Worth Metropolitan Statistical Area. Weaver and Tidwell's Sealed Dollar Cost Bid page 2 Proposal to Perform Professional Audit Services for the City of Southlake, Texas City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM September 2, 1994 TO: Curtis E. Hawk,City Manager FROM: Karen P. Gandy,Zoning Administrator SUBJECT: ZA 94-82 Rezoning Request/Ordinance No.480-142 REQUESTED ACTION: Rezoning of a 3.122 acre tract of land situated in the Thomas Easter Survey,Abstract No.474,being a portion of Tract 11E and being the proposed Lot 1,E.C. White Addition LOCATION: East of South Kimball Ave., South of East Southlake Blvd., on the Northwest side of Crooked Lane OWNER/APPLICANT: E.C. White CURRENT ZONING: "AG" Agricultural REQUESTED ZONING: "SF-1" Single-Family Residential District LAND USE CATEGORY: Low Density Residential(Within 65 Ldn Airport Overlay Zone) NO. NOTICES SENT: Twelve (12) RESPONSES: Two written responses received outside the 200' notification area: * Peter porrer Area 7 SPIN Representative. 1214 WoodseyCL, in favor; will be glad to see a home built there and the grass mowed,this will also alleviate the traffic blind spot on Crooked Lane. *Kelcie T.Nance 1349 Crosstimbers Dr.,opposed;feels that the noise associated with the nearby airport runway is sufficient to disallow this rezoning request for residential use. P&Z ACTION: August 4, 1994; Approved(7-0) to table ZA 94-82 Rezoning Request at Applicant's request to the August 18, 1994 Planning and Zoning Meeting and continue the Public Hearing. August 18, 1994; Approved(6-0)ZA 94-82 Rezoning Request. KPG/bls G:\WPF%MEMO\CASES\9482-ZWM . .Q.. C,r'K Cop .�"..Vr# " Mtn+ :ationca ftwpoirt. Li P.FOGM EWPCuHve bared= September 1, 1994 f The Honorable Gary FickesMayor, City of Southlakebb7 Forth Carroll Avenue - � Southlake, Texas 76092 RE: ZA 9482; Rezoning and Replatting of fat 1,EC White Addition to the City-of Southlake Dear Mayor Fickes: Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport("pFW)appreciates the efforts of the city staff of Southlake to comply with the 1988 Settlement Agreement in considering the proposed zoning change on the subject property. We understand that Southlake-has agreed that two paragraphs("Insert 1 and T) will be inserted into the proposed ordinance 480-142 as reflected on the attached document. We understand that Southlake has agreed that, as a condition of rezoning and replatting this property,an avigation easement giving a right-of-way for aircraft operations will be obtained from the owner of the property. We have also been assured by Southlake that the proposed zoning change does not include any property within the 75 LDN contour. Relying upon the understanding and.agreements stated herein, DFW withdrms its prior letter of August. 18, 1994,to the extent it refers to zoning change ZA 94-82. We appreciate your cooperation and willingnm to work with us on this matter. aCom ?44 irector BusinDevelopment enclosure cc: Curtis Hawk; Wayne Olson, atty.; Southlake L Sagar, A. Sanchez, G. Keane, K. Robertson, DFW G. T. Wade, FAA; M. Karam, ATA File: 1730.1.5 Ad.WinWaahve Offlow • 32W Ecmt Aifflold holve • Post Office Drawar 61940 DFW Aupoxt.Yea=75261-9429 21415748M 4 ' INSERT 1 7 WHERW, the City Council of the City of Southlake, Texas, further considered among other things the settlement agreement by and among the City of Southlake, the Federal Aviation Administration, the Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport Board, American Airlines, I:nQ, and Delta Air Lines,Inc.,made efttive as of March 14, 19K as well as Airport Compatible Land Use Zoning Ordinance No. 479, adopted at the City of Southlake,Team Regular City Council Meeting of March 6, 1990,and has determined that the reactive changes iu the zoning classification for the tract or tracts of land should be made in accordance with such agreement and ordinance; and �� 3 - SEP 61 '94 17:22 DFW AIRPORT-P/E (214)574-8709 P.9 INSERT 2 This property is located in the noise contour established for DFW Airport. Therefore, in addition to the regulations contained is Ordinance No.480,as amended,this property is subject to the Airport Overlay Zone regulations set forth in Airport Compatible Land Use Zoning Ordinance No.479. 4 KA Dallas;;Fort Worth lnternatlonaY Airport Jeffrey P. Fegan Executive Director August 18, 1994 e P I Z The Honorable Gary Fickes Mayor, City of Southlake 667 N. Carroll Avenue Southlake, Texas 76092 Subject: Zone Changes ZA-94-82 and ZA-94-83 Dear Mayor Fickes: Dallas/Fort Worth International ("DFW")Airport appreciates the opportunity to comment on Zone Changes ZA-94-82 and ZA-94-83, Thomas Easter Survey, Abstract No. 474, Tract 11E, including Lot 1, E. C. White Addition, located east of South Kimball Avenue, south of East Southlake Blvd on the west side of Crooked Lane. The proposed changes are from agricultural"AG"to single family residential district "SF-1", with a preliminary plat also proposed. As illustrated on Exhibit 1, the Official Noise Contours for DFW Airport, which were the basis for the 1988 Settlement Agreement with the City of Southlake,the proposed zone change is located near the 75 LDN Noise Contours. Noise sensitive land uses, such as residences, schools, hospitals and places of worship within the 65 LDN are considered incompatible land uses. Moreover,to have such a noise sensitive land use as that proposed near or adjacent to the 75 LDN contour is clearly incompatible. As such, DFW Airport objects to the proposed zone chance and preliminary plat. At a minimum, the following two conditions must be met: 1. An avigation easement be dedicated to the Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport, sample copy attached; and 2. The City of Southlake require, and assure compliance with, all structures achieve a minimum Noise Level Reduction of 30 dB to provide a maximum interior noise level of 45 DNL in all habitable rooms. Please contact my office at (214) 574-6719 if you have any questions. i ce , lay Pasl Deputy Exec 've 'rector Business and Commercial Developme RCP:klr Attachments cc: FAA; DFW Legal; DFW Government Affairs; Curtis Hawk, City Manager, Southlake ?A- Mrnlnishrative Offices 3200 East Airfield Drive Post r 619428 DFW Airport,Tams 75261-9428 214/574-8888 3 ' AVIGATION CASEMENT STATE OF TEXAS § COUNTY OF TARRANT § Whereas, herein after called "Owner" is the owner of that certain parcel of land situated in the City of Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas, being more particularly described as City of Southlake, Texas. Now, therefore, in consideration of the sum of One and No/100 Dollars ($1.00) and other good and valuable consideration the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby fully acknowledged and confessed,Owner does: for the unlimited use and benefit of the public and its agencies,hereby waive release, remise, quitclaim, and forever hold harmless the Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport Board, the Cities of Dallas and Fort Worth, Texas and their respective successors and assigns, hereinafter called Airport, from any and all claims for damages of any kind that Owner may have or may hereafter have in the future relating in any way to the passage of any and all aircraft (aircraft being defined as any contrivance now known or hereinafter invented, used or designed for navigation of or flight in the air), landing at or taking off from, or operating at or on the Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport,including,without limitation,future Runways 16/34 East and West,or any other airport owned by the City of Dallas and/or the City of Fort Worth, and/or the Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport Board,by whomsoever operated, in the air space above the Property at heights either (a) above the imaginary surfaces as established by and shown on "The Hazard Zoning Maps of the Joint Airport Zoning Board for the Dallas/Fort Worth Regional Airport" identified and incorporated in the Airport Zoning Ordinance of the Dallas/Fort Worth Regional Airport,Ordinance No. 71-100,as may be amended from time to time, to which reference is hereby made for all purposes and which maps are incorporated herein by reference, to an infinite height above or (b) above the elevation of 1,000 feet mean sea level, to an infinite heights above, which height is lower, together with the right in all air space above the surface of the Property to cause damages to the Property or to persons occupying or on such Property, from noise, vibration, fumes, dust, fuel and lubricant particles, and all other effects that may be caused by the operation of an aircraft landing at and taking off from, or operating at or on the Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport as it is now or as it may hereinafter be configured including, without limitation, Runways 16/34 East and West, or any other airport owned by the Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport Board and/or the City of Dallas,and/or the City of Fort Worth, above the heights described above and Owner does, for the unlimited use and benefit of the public and its agencies, hereby waive, remise and release any right or cause of action which it may now have or which it may in the future have against Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport Board, the Cities of Dallas and Fort Worth, Texas and their respective successors and assigns, whether such claim be for injury to person or damages to or taking of property, due to noise, vibration, fumes, dust, fuel and lubricant particles, and all other effects that may be caused or may have been caused by the operation of aircraft landing at, or taking off from, or the operation and/or maintenance of aircraft or aircraft engines at or on said Airport, including, without limitation, Runways 16/34 East and West. This instrument does not release the owners or operators of aircraft from liability for damage or injury to person or property caused by falling aircraft, or falling physical objects from aircraft, except as stated herein with respect to noise, fumes, dust, fuel and lubricant particles. Owner specially agrees that the execution by the Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport Board of any assignment or assignments of the terms of this Release to any other municipal corporation or public agency shall extend the terms hereof to any such assignee were specifically names herein and without extinguishment of its terms as to said Airport Board, and it is agreed that this Release shall be binding upon (owner's name) , his or their heirs and assigns, and to any and all successors in interest to said property located in (development) an addition to the City of Southlake,Texas,and it is further agreed that this instrument shall be a covenant running with the land, and shall be recorded in the Deed Records of Tarrant County, Texas. In witness thereof, we have hereunto set our hands this day of , A.D. 1994. STATE OF TEXAS § COUNTY OF TARRANT § This instrument was acknowledged before me on the day of by My Commission Expires: Notary Public, State of Texas Notary's printed name • �� � see©else :� = == •�� �! �MMMW c Ion" fir: ■'- ...,�. ���+� lb � J J •V.Ji•.•.1, I/ lW> L LM L.f11 !':eft• ro rl., r-311b 1 III ffft•fs.� . i SPIN #7 REPRUSENTATIVE: PETER SPORRER 2 D � oD G. Thompson I "SF-1„ P51 Ea T - 0�tve a 0 p,Ks 5 P,41 i ME A E. C. White I 25Q TR 11E q 16.96 AC C. Johnson j "AG" J. Forbus: ,SF-1 5 " "SF-1" TR 110 6 1.5 AC D. Faglie. v R. Baca "SF-1" G. FOXj TR ]103 2 AC � 7 "SF-1" B. Struempler TR 5 1 i "SF-1" 18.503 . I D. Robert "SF-1 I Q1 TR J. McCue; l0 ]i SOUTHLAKE CI1 0 h ti ' ,titi� D2 TR 1 10 i ..- _-- --- •- ]0 �Q r .567 2.5 AC 0� AC I �QN, 4C R S. O M. Kendrick 1105A o TR 1105A1 ADJACENT OWNERS 1 .967 AC AND ZONING 1 s CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS LW ORDINANCE NO. 480-142 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 BEIN MORE FULLY AND COMPLETELY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT "A" FROM TO 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 Z: .. GAORDWNWG1480.142 Page 1 $�1- Ib WHEREAS,the hereinafter described property is currently zoned as ' ` nder 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 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. GAORrn70NING o.ia2 Page 2 1 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: wbein ,�'`��acre tract of land situated in the Wd u and more fully and com letel described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and inco orated herein, from to MON Section 2. That the City Manager is hereby directed to correct the Official Zoning map of the City of Southlake, Texas,to reflect the herein changes in zoning. Section 3. That in all other respects the use of the tract or tracts of land herein above described shall be subject to all the applicable regulations contained in said Zoning Ordinance and all other applicable and pertinent ordinances for the City of Southlake,Texas. All existing sections, subsections,paragraphs,sentences,words,phrases and definitions of said Zoning Ordinance are not amended hereby,but remain intact and are hereby ratified, verified, and affirmed. Section 4. That the zoning regulations and districts as herein established have been made in accordance with the comprehensive plan for the purpose of promoting the health, safety, morals and the general welfare of the community. They have been designed, with respect to both present conditions and the conditions reasonably anticipated to exist in the foreseeable future; to lessen congestion in the streets;to provide adequate light and air; to prevent over-crowding of land; to avoid undue concentration of population;and to facilitate the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewerage, drainage and surface water, parks and other commercial needs and development of the community. They have been made after a full and complete hearing with reasonable consideration among other things of the character of the district and its peculiar suitability for the particular uses and with a view of conserving the value of buildings and encouraging the most appropriate use of land throughout the community. Section 5. That this ordinance shall be cumulative of all other ordinances of the City of Southlake, Texas, affecting zoning and shall not repeal any of the provisions of said ordinances except in those instances where provisions of those ordinances are in direct conflict with the provisions of this ordinance. GAORDWrQNG".142 Page 3 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. 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 , 1994. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY G:10RDWNU4GVM.142 Page 4 U -1 3 s taw PASSED AND APPROVED on the 2nd reading the day of , 1994. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: CITY ATTORNEY DATE: ADOPTED: EFFECTIVE: GAORDWNOVGW90.142 Page 5 EXMIT "A" LOT 1 , E.C. WHITE ADDITION TO THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE TARRANT COUNTY,. TEXAS, BEING A TRACT IN THE THOMAS EASTER SURVEY ABSTRACT NO. 474, TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS, AND BEING A PORTION OT THE TRACT DESCRIBED IN A DEED TO E.C. WHITE AND WIFE ZADA WHITE OF RECORD IN VOLUME 7525, PAGE 2268, DEED RECORDS, TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS, SAID PORTION BEING MORE. PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED BY METES AND BOUNDS AS FOLLOWS; BEGINNING at a 5/8" iron found at the Southeast corner of Lot 11 , Meadow Oaks Subdivision in the City of Southlake, as shown on a plat of record in Volume 388-129, Page 39, Plat Records, Tarrant County, Texas; THENCE N. 00-12' -00"W. 753.20 feet along the East line of said subdivision to a point in same for corner; THENCE S. 520-111 -07"E.- 452.71 feet to a point in the Westerly line of Crooked Lane for corner; THENCE along the westerly line of said Crooked Lane the following courses and distances; S.320-371 -00"W. 40.00 feet to a pipe found, S36O-161 -00"W. 340.90 feet to a pipe found, S. . 400-04' -00"W. 138 .00 feet to a pipe found,and S.340-47' -00"W. 75.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING and containing 3.122 acres . G.10RD90Nff4a%480.142 Page 6 'T City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM September 2, 1994 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Karen P. Gandy,Zoning Administrator SUBJECT: ZA 94-83 Preliminary Plat REQUESTED ACTION: Preliminary Plat for Lots 1 and 2, E.C. White Addition,being 16.968 acres situated in the Thomas Easter Survey, Abstract No. 474, Tract 11E LOCATION: East of South Kimball Ave., South of East Southlake Blvd., on the Northwest side of Crooked Lane OWNER/APPLICANT: E.C. White CURRENT ZONING: "AG" Agricultural REQUESTED ZONING: "SF-1"Single-Family Residential District for the 3.122 Acres proposed as Lot 1 (Within 65 Ldn Airport Overlay Zone), and the proposed Lot 2 to remain "AG" Agricultural (Within 75 Ldn Airport Overlay Zone) LAND USE CATEGORY: Low Density Residential NO. NOTICES SENT: Twenty-two (22) RESPONSES: Three written responses received inside the 200' notification area: *Emily Shanklin. 2627 E. Southlake Blvd., in favor. * Robert Lyford, 6502 Santolina Cove, Austin. Tx., undecided about; he does not know enough about this request to make an informed judgement. * Carol Demlon. 1022 Summemlace Ln.,in favor; this area is adjacent to already established residential and is the best use to preserve the beauty of the area. One written response received outside the 200' notification area: * Peter Sporrer. Area 7 SPIN Representative. 1214 WoodseX Ct„ in favor; will be glad to see a home built there and the grass mowed,this will also alleviate the traffic blind spot on Crooked Lane. 01 P&Z ACTION: August 4, 1994; Approved(7-0)to table ZA 94-83 Preliminary Plat at Applicant's request to the August 18, 1994 Planning and Zoning Meeting and continue the Public Hearing. City of Southlake,Texas August 18, 1994; Approved (6-0) ZA 94-83 Preliminary Plat subject to the Plat Review Summary dated July 29, 1994 adding item #8 providing an additional 5'R.O.W. dedication (making a total of 25' of R.O.W. dedication from the apparent centerline of Crooked Lane). STAFF COMMENTS: The Applicant has met all the review comments of the first Plat Review Summary dated July 29, 1994 with the exception of those items addressed in the attached second Plat Review Summary dated September 2, 1994. KPG/bls G:\WPF\MEMO\CASES\94-83-PP.WPD. X��� Vw-f or-�jpv r # Zrlitwna."oncd n lrport Jeffiey P reg= £+09Glstfve Mector September 1, 1994 The Honorable Gary Fickes :+ , Mayor, City of Southlake - 667 North Carroll Avenue Southlake, Texas 76092 RE: Z,A 94-B2; Rezoning and Replatting of Lot 1,EC White Addition to the City-of Southlake Dear Mayor Fickes: Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport("DFW")appreciates the efforts of the city staff of Southlake to comply with the 1988 Settlement Agreement in considering the proposed zoning change on the subject property. We understand that Southtalke.has agreed that two paragraphs ("Insert 1 and 2") will be inserted into the proposed ordinance 480-142 as reflected on the attached document. We understand that Southlake has agreed that, as a condition of rezoning and replatting this property,an avigation easement giving a right-of-way for aircraft operations will be obtained from the owner of the property. We have also been assurcd by Southlake that the proposed coning change does not include any property within the 75 LDN contour. Relying upon the understanding and.agreements stated herein, DPW withdraws its prior letter of August 18, 1994,to the extent it refers to zoning change ZA 94-82. We appreciate your cooperation and willingness to work with us on this matter. ' i L 44 Clay Pas Deputy Executive irector, Business and Corn cfa Development enclosure cc: Curtis Hawk, Wayne Cason, atty.; Soutblake L. Sagalr, A- Sanchez, G. Keane, K. Robertson, DFW G- T_ Wage, FAA; M. Karam, ATA File: 1730.1.5 �5b-3 Ad.winitkodve OMOBS - 32W East Airflald 1)Aw • Post Office rhawer 619438 DFW Airport- TtaW 75261-9a2g 214/574-8U8 INSERT 1 y � WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Southlake, Texas, further considered among other things the settlement agreement by and among the City of Southlake, the Federal Aviation Administration, the Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport Board, American Airlines, fnc., and Delta Ait Lines,Inc.,made affective as of March 14, 19K as well as Airport Compatible Land Use Zoning Ordinance No. 479, adopted at the City of Southlake,Tom Regular City Council Meeting of March 6, 19-K and has determined that the respc Give changes in the zoning classification for the tract or tracts of land should be made in accordance with such agreement and ordinance; and z:tr W1 J44 1i•GG UrW H11'rUt1-rit �L14! (4-trU'� r.� ' INSERT 2 This property is located in the noise contour established for DFW Airport. Therefore, in addition to the regulations container!in Ordinance No.480,as amended,this property is subject to the Airport Ovmbq Zone regulations set forth in Airport Compatible Land Use Zoning Ordinance No.479. '`fir Dallas;/;Fort Worth International Airport Jeffrey P. Fegan Executive Director August 18, 1994 PIZ e The Honorable Gary Fickes Mayor, City of Southlake 667 N. Carroll Avenue Southlake, Texas 76092 Subject: Zone Changes ZA-94-82 and ZA-94-83 Dear Mayor Fickes: Dallas/Fort Worth International ("DFW") Airport appreciates the opportunity to comment on Zone Changes ZA-94-82 and ZA-94-83, Thomas Easter Survey, Abstract No. 474, Tract 11E, including Lot 1, E. C. White Addition, located east of South Kimball Avenue, south of East Southlake Blvd on the west side of Crooked Lane. The proposed changes are from agricultural"AG"to single family residential district "SF-1", with a preliminary plat also proposed. As illustrated on Exhibit 1, the Official Noise Contours for DFW Airport, which were the basis for the 1988 Settlement Agreement with the City of Southlake,the proposed zone change is located near the 75 LDN Noise Contours. Noise sensitive land uses, such as residences, schools, hospitals and places of worship within the 65 LDN are considered incompatible land uses. Moreover,to have such a noise sensitive land use as that proposed near or adjacent to the 75 LDN contour is clearly incompatible. As such, DFW Airport objects to the proposed zone chan a and preliminatyplat. At a minimum, the following two conditions must be met: 1. An avigation easement be dedicated to the Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport, sample copy attached; and 2. The City of Southlake require, and assure compliance with, all structures achieve a minimum Noise Level Reduction of 30 dB to provide a maximum interior noise level of 45 DNL in all habitable rooms. Please contact my office at (214) 574-6719 if you have any questions. zCommercial D &Developme Business RCP:kIr Attachments cc: FAA; DFW Legal; DFW Government f lis Hawk, City Manager, Southlake 2;6- 4 Administrative Offices - 3200 East Airfield Drive - Post Office Drawer 619428 - DFW Airoort. Texas 75261-9428 - 214/574-98RR AVIGATION CASEMENT STATE OF TEXAS § COUNTY OF TARRANT § Whereas, herein after called "Owner" is the owner of that certain parcel of land situated in the City of Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas, being more particularly described as , City of Southlake, Texas. Now, therefore, in consideration of the sum of One and No/100 Dollars ($1.00) and other good and valuable consideration the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby fully acknowledged and confessed, Owner does: for the unlimited use and benefit of the public and its agencies,hereby waive release, remise, quitclaim, and forever hold harmless the Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport Board, the Cities of Dallas and Fort Worth, Texas and their respective successors and assigns, hereinafter called Airport, from any and all claims for damages of any kind that Owner may have or may hereafter have in the future relating in any way to the passage of any and all aircraft (aircraft being defined as any contrivance now known or hereinafter invented, used or designed for navigation of or flight in the air), landing at or taking off from, or operating at or on the Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport,including,without limitation, future Runways 16/34 East and West,or any other airport owned by the City of Dallas and/or the City of Fort Worth, and/or the Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport Board, by whomsoever operated, in the air space above the Property at heights either (a) above the imaginary surfaces as established by and shown on "The Hazard Zoning Maps of the Joint Airport Zoning Board for the Dallas/Fort Worth Regional Airport" identified and incorporated in the Airport Zoning Ordinance of the Dallas/Fort Worth Regional Airport,Ordinance No.71-100, as may be amended from time to time, to which reference is hereby made for all purposes and which maps are incorporated herein by reference, to an infinite height above or (b) above the elevation of 1,000 feet mean sea level, to an infinite heights above, which height is lower, together with the right in all air space above the surface of the Property to cause damages to the Property or to persons occupying or on such Property, from noise, vibration, fumes, dust, fuel and lubricant particles, and all other effects that may be caused by the operation of an aircraft landing at and taking off from, or operating at or on the Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport as it is now or as it may hereinafter be configured including, without limitation, Runways 16/34 East and West, or any other airport owned by the Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport Board and/or the City of Dallas,and/or the City of Fort Worth, above the heights described above and Owner does, for the unlimited use and benefit of the public and its agencies, hereby waive, remise and release any right or cause of action which it may now have or which it may in the future have against Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport Board, the Cities of Dallas and Fort Worth, Texas and their respective successors and assigns, whether such claim be for injury to person or damages to or taking of property, due to noise, vibration, fumes, dust, fuel and lubricant particles, and all other effects that may be caused or may have been caused by the operation of aircraft landing at, or taking off from, or the operation and/or maintenance of aircraft or aircraft engines at or on said Airport, including, without limitation, Runways 16/34 East and West. This instrument does not release the owners or operators of aircraft from liability for damage or injury to person or property caused by falling aircraft, or falling physical objects from aircraft, except as stated herein with respect to noise, fumes, dust, fuel and lubricant particles. �w Owner specially agrees that the execution by the Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport Board of any assignment or assignments of the terms of this Release to any other municipal corporation or public agency shall extend the terms hereof to any such assignee were specifically names herein and without extinguishment of its terms as to said Airport Board, and it is agreed that this Release shall be binding upon (owner's name) , his or their heirs and assigns, and to any and all successors in interest to said property located in (development) an addition to the City of Southlake,Texas,and it is further agreed that this instrument shall be a covenant running with the land, and shall be recorded in the Deed Records of Tarrant County, Texas. In witness thereof, we have hereunto set our hands this day of_ , A.D. 1994. STATE OF TEXAS S COUNTY OF TARRANT This instrument was acknowledged before me on the day of by My Commission Expires: Notary Public, State of Texas Notary's printed name �Sb� (p - .mm&- �■ it �Wc Sh COMA ■i■■ ©©� � lrEill■�'��11111111111� ����•��� �� Gall 111111111�4.wa.1��c11� � � ,;ii, : �� _� �� I �r✓�`• _�11111 IIIt1111111 iw QCilwCC r� C �,� ,t�1111111r. r { � == 11/ ,t111111111'� YC�,� a list,�t11111111� o :bunulluoNNW �-�� l ■���Ir.� J:i11114I '" _ � �w■�tttttt�V 'n, �. �■■ ■kid. FAI �Mj:'�'d j LlLum a'..•9-0 c.a-n ui �.,. a: door l=*NHvw v N i1 / \ 1 ^ v N tI- 1^ in . i. ~� rLU ^ NI z 'n i V t Z o z E: Q ( LL a I 1 O E � < v) l zNib ., 0 a: w O Y r W 0 s Fa--W r 1 U �Q zfr m aQ C : W Ir in m c CC ($ �`' cc v l 1 > W Q ( m Y 1 �.� < a F- a. a (.n I � 1 C7 ca E t 1 cn = 00 _ Q ¢ alcr � -- _ in E _ '- > 2 ti cc to m ¢ca ¢ I t- a 3 , 0 ` = o Aso I' v U - yJae t61 61 ^ tL U e v N r —00 m 06 :- m n Y ' J s LL Y O = O cc g '1 EL i = O inLL _ Q LL IL II c ? 0 ( Cl) CD - 1 N O y CO ` O rn 1 m d I Q C O I .' v \� E t I ^ N 0 rn t v 0 0 w ca .0 City of Southlake,Texas PLAT REVIEW SUMMAR(W Y Case No: ZA 94-83 Review No: Two Date of Review: 09/02/94 Project Name: Prelininaa Plat-Lots 1 &2 Block t E.C. White Addition OWNER/APPLICANT: ENGINEER/SURVEYOR: E.C. White Ward Surveying Company P.O. Box 465 P.O. Box 820253 Whiteside,TX 79379-0465 Fort Worth,TX 76182-0253 Phone: Phone: (817) 281-5411 Fax: Fax: (817) 838-7093 CITY STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE ABOVE REFERENCED PROJECT RECEIVED BY THE CITY ON 08/22/1994 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 TOM ELGIN AT(817)481-5581,EXT.753. 1. Please show the existing Crooked Lane pavement typical width. 2. Provide a 5'R.O.W. dedication such that there is a total dedication of 25' from apparent centerline of existing R.O.W. cc: E.C. White Ward Surveying Company i2�3 :`5 �• :S� S�:•.:.'i:•;:i i.3�= ?i iE I 312,333= s3. : i3}; " YBw;=::?'• a.: ' 'iE'e ' - Y At.": i- i- :tF _S •f .:_ .$ R Y Y lit: _ - z zIlA c W W Q ti s� _ � � _ \ �µ • Q Y ~ „gym O 1 h 1 0 Q • \e _ a m z. - = 1Z uj gio W � "E _ 4�a a $• <aF a6f6 wo- 17 0 a4'4aP e'°s�a . Y` 6£Od 6'ZI-88£-l0A n40IPIAl08fl5 SVVO MOOV3W 1 I - � I Q Z Q JX pX W NW Z F F f S 0W ZW 'z® s FS ZS UD Z> O ZO W J VI cQQ a aCJ- ,� S City of Southlake,Texas CITY MANAGER MEMORANDUM September 1, 1994 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Lou Ann Heath, Director of Finance SUBJECT: FY1994-95 Budget During the budget work sessions with Council on August 17 and 18, the City Council reviewed the City Manager's proposed FY1994-95 Budget. There are two components to the Budget, the Operating Budget and the Capital Projects Budget. In past years, the Council has adopted an Operating Budget. Adjustments to the proposed General Fund budget include an additional allocation to GRACE in the City Secretary/Mayor/Council Division, adding $2,500 for a total of $7,500. A reduction in the travel and tuition line items within the Division offset the addition. A major program discussed with the Council is the Neighborhood Sewer program. The proposed budget included $750,000 as a capital outlay line item in the Utility Fund's Sewer Division to initiate this program. At the work sessions, the Council directed Staff to explore an expanded multiple year approach, prioritizing neighborhoods based on needs. Public Works Director Bob Whitehead developed a three year$4,370,500 proposal, with five neighborhoods listed in the first year at an estimated cost of$1,158,000. The Capital Projects Fund Summary proposes that $1.3 million certificates of obligation be sold to fund the first year of the assessment program. The All Funds Summary retains the $750,000 as a transfer from the Utility Fund to the Waterworks Improvement Fund. These funds can be used for other water and wastewater projects not eligible for funding through impact fees. Last Council meeting the Corridor Study contract was amended and increased by $15,000. These funds were not reflected in the FY1994-95 budget within Community Development. It is proposed that the funding included within Community Development for the Trails System Master Plan($20,000) be instead allocated for this Corridor Study contract. The Trails System Master Plan is proposed to be funded through the Park Dedication Fee Fund. Operating Budget..The All Funds Summary reflects revenues of$14,485,420. Total Expenditures are proposed at $14,477,603. This is an increase of$271,310 over the budget presented at the work sessions. This increase is comprised of the $20,000 added to expenditures in the Park Dedication Fee Fund for the Trails System Master Plan. The balance of$251,310 is the operating transfer from the SPDC Operating Fund to the SPDC Debt Service Fund. This amount had been included in the SPDC Operating Fund summary, but was not reflected in the All Funds Summary. Curtis E. Hawk FY1994-95 Budget September 1, 1994 Page 2 Capital Projects Budget. This budget is a compilation of projects funded through bond sales, impact fees, the 1/2 cent sales tax, perimeter road fees, operating fund transfers and other sources. It lists all major capital improvement projects by fund, grouped according to improvement type. There are water and wastewater projects, streets/drainage and parks projects. The budget proposes $8,343,689 in revenues and other sources of funds. Total Expenditures proposed are $11,629,951. An Infrastructure Reserve Fund is established through the transfer of $820,026 from the General Fund operating budget for street and drainage improvements. The Capital Projects budget also includes the Assessment Program. LAH ORDINANCE NO. 624 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL -OF THE CITY i OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS, APPROVING REVISED BUDGET FIGURES FOR FISCAL YEAR 1993-94; APPROVING AND ADOPTING THE BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING OCTOBER 1, 1994, AND TERMINATING SEPTEMBER 30, 1995, AND MAKING APPROPRIATIONS FOR EACH DEPARTMENT, PROJECT AND ACCOUNT; REPEALING CONFLICTING ORDINANCES; PROVIDING A SAVINGS AND SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City Manager has prepared a revision of certain figures in the 1993-94 budget and submitted same to the City Council; and, WHEREAS, the City Manager of the City of Southlake, Texas (hereinafter referred to as the "City") has caused to be filed with the City Secretary a budget to cover all proposed expenditures of the government of the City for the fiscal year beginning October 1, 1994, and ending September 30, 1995, (hereinafter referred to as the "Budget") ; and WHEREAS, the Budget, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein for all purposes, shows as definitely as possible each of the various projects for which appropriations are set up in the Budget, and the estimated amount of money carried in the Budget for each of such projects; and WHEREAS, the Budget has been filed with the City Secretary for at least thirty (30) days and available for inspection by any taxpayer; and WHEREAS, public notice of public hearings on the proposed annual budget, stating the dates, times, places and subject matter of said public hearings, was given as required by the Charter of the City of Southlake and the laws of the State of Texas; and WHEREAS, such public hearings were held on September 6, 1994 and September 20, 1994, prior approval of such dates being hereby ratified and confirmed by the City Council, and all those wishing to speak on the Budget were heard; and WHEREAS, the City Council has studied the Budget and listened to the comments of the taxpayers at the public hearings held therefor and has determined that the Budget attached hereto is in the best interest of the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS: Section 1 . That all of the above premises are found to be true and correct and are incorporated into the body of this Ordinance as if copied in their entirety. Z-15 Section 2 . That the revised figures, prepared and submitted by the City Manager for the 1993-94 budget, be, and the same are hereby, in all things, approved and appropriated, and any necessary transfers between accounts and departments are hereby authorized, approved, and appropriated. Section 3 . That the Budget attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein for all purposes is adopted for the Fiscal Year beginning October 1, 1994, and ending September 30, 1995; and there is hereby appropriated from the funds indicated such projects, operations, activities, purchases and other expenditures as proposed in the Budget. Section .4 . That the City Manager shall file or cause to be filed a true and correct copy of the approved Budget, along with this ordinance, with the City Secretary and in the office of the County Clerks of Denton and Tarrant County, Texas, as required by State law. Section 5 . That any and all ordinances, resolutions, rules, regulations, policies or provisions in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby repealed and rescinded to the extent of conflict herewith. Section 6 . If any section, article, paragraph, sentence, clause, phrase or word in this Ordinance, or application thereto any person or circumstances is held invalid or unconstitutional by a Court of competent jurisdiction, such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance, and the City Council hereby declares it would have passed such remaining portions of this Ordinance despite such invalidity, which remaining portions shall remain in full force and effect . Section 7 . That the necessity of adopting and approving a proposed budget for the next fiscal year as required by the laws of the State of Texas requires that this Ordinance shall take effect immediately from and after its passage, and it is accordingly so ordained. PASSED AND APPROVED on first reading this day of 1994. Gary Fickes, Mayor ATTEST: Sandra L. LeGrand City Secretary Page 2 Ordinance No. 624 b:ORD-624.BGT/ORD&RBS/kb 41 �V PASSED AND APPROVED ON second reading this day of 1,994. Gary Fickes, Mayor ATTEST: Sandra L. LeGrand City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney Date: Adopted: Effective: Page 3 Ordinance No. 624 b:ORO-621.BOT/OROiRES/kb CITY OF SOUTHLAKE PROPOSED BUDGET 1994-95 ALL FUNDS SUMMARY Special Revenue General Debt Service Utility Parks/ Fund Fund Fund Recreation SPDC Total Projected Revenues-FY94-95 $6,868,850 $1,652,510 $4,963,600 $107,650 $892,810 $14,485,420 Less: Projected Expenditures $6,831,198 $1.594,508 $5,417,247 $83,350 $551,300 $14,477,603 Total-Expenditures-FY94-95 $6,831,198 $1,594,508 $5,417,247 $83,350 $551,300 $14,477,603 C.O. Proceeds(net) 414,180 0 0 0 0 414,180 Transfer to Infrastructure (820,026) 0 0 0 0 (820,026) Net Revenues (Sam-1941 2 /$453.6471 $341,510 (5398.0291 Estimated Fund Balance/ Working Capital 9/30194 $1,543.972 $241,029 $1,827,722 $59,653 $409,163 $4,081,539 Estimated Fund Balance/ Working Capital9/30195 $1,175,778 $299,031 $1,374,075 $83.953 $750.673 $3,683.510 1993-94 1993-94 1994-95 $Inc Teasel 1992-93 Adopted Revised Proposed (Decrease) %Increase/ Emnditures Actual Budget Budget Budget Adopted -Decrease General Fund Personnel $2,503,204 $3,170,715 $3,165,055 $4,111,936 $941,221 29.7% Operations 1,446,772 1.513,643 1,605,017 2,063,354 549,711 36.3% Capital Outlay 503,797 1,178,449 1.238,808 1) Total Expenditures $4,453,773 $5,862,767 $6,008.880 $6.831.198 $968.431 16.5% Debt Service Fund Debt Service $654,983 $1,063,382 $1,241.920 $1,342,923 $279,541 26.3% Debt Service-TRA bonds 231,861 246,448 246,448 251,585 5.1377 2.1% Total Expenditures $886,844 $1,309,830 $1,488,368 $1,594,508 $284,678 21.7% Utility Fund Personnel $357,771 $394.653 $440,232 $451,405 $56,752 14.4% Operations 2.060,136 2,350,494 2,689.214 3.067,858 717.364 30.5% Capital Outlay 153.437 280.400 342.400 519,375 238,975 85.2% Debt Service 79,719 81,895 81,895 78,525 (3,370) -4.1% Operating Transfer/Other 291,367 294,613 294,613 1,300,084 1,005,471 341.3% Total Expenses $2,942,430 $3,402,055 $3,848.354 $5,417.247 $2,015,192 59.2% Special Revenue-Parks/Recreation Operations $0 $0 $0 $20,000 $20,000 100.0% Capital Outlay 15.996 520,867 665,310 63.350 (457,517) -8�7 % Total Expenditures $15,996 $520,867 $665,310 $83,350 ($437,517) -84.0% SPDC Personnel $0 $0 $8,252 $47,680 $47.680 100.0% Operations 0 0 0 0 0 100.0% Capital Outlay 0 0 0 0 0 100.0% Debt Service 0 0 0 252,310 252,310 100.0% Operating Transfer 0 0 0 251,310 251,310 100.0% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $0 $0 $8,252 $551,300 $551,300 100.0% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $8.299.043 $11.095.519 S2.019.164 $14A77.603 $3.382.084 30.5% 7C:�-�,l r PROPOSED BUDGET 1994-95 ALL FUNDS SUMMARY EXPENDITURES BY CATEGORY 1993-94 1993-94 1994-95 $ Increase/ % Increase/ 1992-93 Adopted Revised Proposed (Decrease) -Decrease FUND Actual Budget Budget Budget Adopted Adopted General Fund Personnel 2,503.204 3,157,944 3,165,055 4,111,936 953,992 30.2% Operations 1,446,772 1,526,414 1,605,017 2,063,354 536,940 35.2% Capital Outlay 503,797 1,178,409 1,238,808 655,908 (522,501 -44.3% Total 4.453,773 5,862.767 6.008,880 6,831,198 968,431 16.5% Debt Service Fund Debt Service 654,983 1,063,382 1,241.920 1,342,923 279,541 26.3% Debt Service-TRA bonds 231,861 246A48 246,448 251,585 0,137 2.1% Total 886,844 1.309,830 1,488,368 1,594,508 284,678 21.7% Utility Fund Personnel 357,771 394,653 440,232 451,405 56,752 14.4% Operations 2,060,136 2,350,494 2.689,214 3,067,858 717,364 30.5% Capital Outlay 153,437 280,400 342,400 519,375 238,975 85.2% Debt Service 79,719 81,895 81,895 78,525 (3,370 -4.1% Other(Capital) 24,072 25,000 25,000 0 (25,000 -100.0% Operating Transfer 267,295 269,613 269,613 1,300,084 1-030,471 38 Total 2,942,430 3,402,055 3,848,354 5,417,247 2,015,192 59.2% (W Special Revenue- Parks/Recreation Fund Operations 0 0 0 20,000 20,000 0.0% Capital Outlay 15.996 520,867 665,310 63,350 (457,517 -87.8% Total 15,996 520,867 665,310 83,350 (437,517 -84.0% SPDC Fund Personnel 0 0 8,252 47,680 47,680 100.0% Operations 0 0 0 0 0 100.0% Capital Outlay 0 0 0 0 0 100.0% Debt Service 0 0 0 252,310 252,310 100.0% Operating Transfer 0 0 0 251,310 251,310 100.0% Total 0 0 8,252 551,300 551,300 100.0% GRAND TOTAL ALL FUNDS 8,299,043 11,095,519 12,019,164 14,477,603 3,382,084 30.5% EXPENDITURE CATEGORY Personnel 2,860,975 3,552,597 3,613,539 4,611,021 1,058,424 29.8% Operations 3,506,908 3,876,908 4,294,231 5,151,212 1,274,304 32.9% Capital Outlay 697,302 2,004,676 2,271,518 1,238,633 (766,043 -38.2% Debt Service 966,563 1.391,725 1,570,263 1,925,343 533,618 38.3% Operating Transfer 267,295 269,613 269,613 1,551,394 1,281,781 475.4% GRAND TOTAL ALL FUNDS 8,299,043 11,095,519 12,019,164 14,477,603 3,382,084 30.5% PROPOSED BUDGET 1994-95 ALL FUNDS SUMMARY EXPENDITURES BY DIVISION/CATEGORY 1993-94 1993-94 1994-95 $ Increase/ %Increase/ 1992-93 Adopted Revised Proposed (Decrease) -Decrease GENERAL FUND Actual BudgetBudget Budget Adopted Adopted City Secretary/Mayor/Council Personnel 58,728 114,582 100,600 69,150 (45.432 -39.7% Operations 74,591 79,709 100,365 115,060 35,351 44.4% Capital Outlay 9.707 ¢,588 18,035 10.388 3,800 57.7% Total 143.026 200.879 219,000 194,598 (6,281 -3.1% City Manager's Office Personnel 124,702 151,393 160,570 261,522 110,129 72.7% Operations 23,416 23,950 30,110 43,106 19,156 80.0% Capital Outlay a 55 2_.735 2,345 0,905 zm 262.2% Total 152,073 178,078 193,025 314.533 136,455 76.6% Economic Development Personnel 0 0 0 57,626 57,626 100.0% Operations 0 0 0 59,619 59,619 100.0% Capital Outlay 0 Q 0 Q 0 100.0% Total 0 0 0 117,245 117,245 100.0% Support Services Personnel 17,056 24,935 24,240 24,755 (180 -0.7% Operations 476,792 502,174 535,140 576,955 74,781 14.9% Capital Outlay 8.796 75.000 75.000 41.075 (33,925 -45.2% Total 502,644 602.109 634,380 642.785 40,676 6.8% Finance Personnel 114,537 170,909 169,710 178,135 7,226 4.2% Operations 73,393 84,979 79,085 87,505 2,526 3.0% Capital Outlay 17,914 5.950 7.295 0 (5,950 -100.0% Total 205,844 261,838 256,090 265,640 3,802 1.5% Municipal Court Personnel 87,024 93.925 94,145 115,865 21,940 23.4% Operations 57,252 74,680 72,840 86,225 11,545 15.5% Capital Outlay 510 0 198 1.900 1900 -100.0% Total 144,786 168.605 167,183 203,990 35,385 21.0% Fire Services Personnel 463,846 547,667 550,667 594,373 46,706 8.5% Operations 78,646 74,277 74,277 78,565 4,288 5.8% Capital Outlay 24.340 98.200 98,200 111,725 13.525 13.8% Total 566,832 720,144 723,144 784,663 64,519 9.0% Police Services Personnel 708,566 830,604 833,604 994,903 164,299 19.8% Operations 98,389 114,385 115,585 132,767 18,382 16.1% Capital Outlay 88.388 79.800 79.800 121,400 41.600 52.1% Total 895,343 1,024,789 1,028,989 1,249,070 224,281 21.9% 7c- e PROPOSED BUGET 1994-95 ALL FUNDS SUMMARY EXPENDITURES BY DIVISION/CATEGORY 1993-94 1993-94 1994-95 $ Increase/ % Increase/ 1992-93 Adopted Revised Proposed (Decrease) -Decrease GENERAL FUND Actual Budoet Budget Budget Adopted Adopted Public Safety Support Personnel 290,062 347,995 347,995 557,360 209,365 60.2% Operations 50,088 67,415 68,215 78,040 10,625 15.8% Capital Outlay 17,118 24,000 24 54,680 30.680 127.8% Total 357,268 439,410 440,210 690,080 250,670 57.0% Building Inspection Personnel 130,367 202,531 197,006 263,313 60,782 30.0% Operations 10,719 21,600 21,300 88,442 66,842 309.5% Capital Outlay 12.919 34,361 41.185 23,400 (10,961 -31.9% Total 154,005 258,492 259,491 375,155 116,663 45.1% Streets/Drainage Personnel 259,939 341,421 339,421 446,022 104,601 30.6% Operations 326,611 308,920 301,580 323,350 14,430 4.7% Capital Outlay 270,944 766,745 800,300 227,700 (539,045 -70.3% Total 857,494 1,417,086 1.441,301 997,072 (420,014 -29.6% Parks and Recreation Personnel 44,148 64,902 72,660 120,705 55,803 86.0% Operations 56,374 73,350 87,662 127,560 54,210 73.9% Capital Outlay 37.702 58.055 66.200 15,895 (42,160 -72.6% Total 138,224 196,307 226,522 264,160 67,853 34.6% Public Works Administration Personnel 54,246 99,170 99,170 190,845 91,675 92.4% Operations 45,449 13,460 16,663 150,550 137,090 1018.5% Capital Outlay 2.369 8.775 10 00 19.100 10,325 117.7% Total 102,064 121,405 126,233 360,495 239,090 196.9% Community Development Personnel 149,983 167,910 175,267 237,362 69,452 41.4% Operations 75,052 87,515 102,195 115,610 28,095 32.1% Capital Outlay 9.135 18.200 15,850 18 540 3.0% Total 234,170 273,625 293,312 371,712 98,087 35.8% TOTAL GENERAL FUND 4,453,773 5,862,767 6.008,880 6,831,198 968,431 16.5% DEBT SERVICE FUND Debt Service 654,983 1,063,382 1,241,920 1,342,923 279,541 26.3% Debt Service-TRA bonds 231,861 246,448 246,448 251,585 5.137 2.1% Total 886,844 1,309,830 1,488,368 1.594,508 284,678 21.7% TOTAL DEBT SERVICE FUND 886,844 1,309,830 1,488,368 1,594,508 284,678 21.7% PROPOSED BUDGET 1994-95 ALL FUNDS SUMMARY EXPENDITURES BY DIVISION/CATEGORY 1993-94 1993-94 1994-95 $Increase/ % Increase/ 1992-93 Adopted Revised Proposed (Decrease) -Decrease UTILITY FUND Actual Budget Budget Budget Adopted Adopted Water Utilities Personnel 313,621 345,901 386,321 347,018 1,117 0.3% Operations 1,426,108 1.237,568 1,763,204 1,966,148 728,580 58.9% Capital Outlay 139,983 266,900 328,900 434,875 167,975 62.9% Total 1,879,712 1,850,369 2,478,425 2,748,041 897,672 48.5% Wastewater Utilities Personnel 44,150 48,752 53,911 104,387 55,635 114.1% Operations 370,978 824,926 621,510 712,910 (112,016 -13.6% Capital Outlay 13.454 13.500 13.500 84.500 71.000 525.9% Total 428,582 887,178 688,921 901,797 14,619 1.6% Sanitation Personnel 0 0 0 0 0 0.0% Operations 263.050 288,000 304,500 388.800 100,800 35.0% Capital Outlay Q 0 0 0 Q 0.0% Total 263,050 288,000 304,500 388,800 100,800 35.0% Non-Departmentalized Other 24,072 25,000 25,000 0 (25,000 -100.0% Debt Service 79,719 81,895 81,895 78,525 (3,370 -4.1% Operating Transfer 267,295 269,613 269,613 1,300,084 1,030,471 382.2% Total 371,086 376,508 376,508 1,378,609 1,002,101 266.2% TOTAL UTILITY FUND 2.942.430 3,402.055 3,848,354 5,417,247 2,015,192 59.2% SPECIAL REVENUE- PARKS/RECREATION FUND Operations 0 0 0 20,000 20,000 100.0% Capital Outlay 15.996 520,867 665,310 63.350 (457,517 -87.8% Total 15,996 520,867 665,310 83,350 (437,517 -84.0% SPDC FUND Personnel 0 0 8,252 47,680 47,680 100.0% Operations&Maintenance 0 0 0 0 0 100.0% Capital Outlay 0 0 0 0 0 100.0% Debt Service 0 0 0 252,310 252,310 100.0% Operating Transfer 0 0 0 251,310 251,310 100.0% Total 0 0 8,252 551,300 551,300 100.0% GRAND TOTAL 8,299,043 11,095.519 12,019,164 14,477,603 3,382,084 30.5% ��-fQ ALL FUNDS SUMMARY REVISED 1993-94 BUDGET and PROPOSED 1994-95 BUDGET 95sumal6.wk4 $.455/$100 1994-95 Adopted 455f;100 1993-94 1993-94 4013100 $Increase/ 1994-95 1992-93 1993-94 993.84.....3 $Increase/ %Increase/ 1994�95 ; (Decrease) %Increase/ REVENUES :: Actual Budget :::::....v let:::ised::::::;;'s (Decrease) -Decrease :pFQpoec:::;:> Adopted -Decrease Ad Valorem Taxes $2,981.048 $3,285.361 ($29,198 -0.9% 3;784 9Q $499,619 15.2% .............._. _...._........._...... Sales Tax 636,737 701.500 <<« 1' 5 ? 323,500 46.1°,6 1;8±1:9.:5f 0 1,148,000 163.6% Franchise Fees 305,909 336,400 :j 61,725 18.3% :>:4#$' ii0 81,640 24.3% ... ...- Fines 182,271 231.440 237 960 0 4% 242.400 10,9W 4.7% ........._............. _..._................... .......................... _._..............._.. .................. .._....................... _. ............... Charges for Services 59,087 57.250 : __ 63 6,295 11.0°,6 : ';;; 800.w: 22,750 39.7% ........................ ..................._. _........._........... _....._........... ............................ _................ Permits/Fees 1,398,832 1,138,000 'l ?13E 579,020 50.9% 2t14135f1 903,350 79.4% Miscellaneous 121,435 35,4,W 9 57,335 161 8% 83 350: 57,910 163.4% Transfer-Interfund 267,295 421,613rtX ;Gt 155,000 36.8% ::::: :: : ::::9t61a"0 494,537 117.3% Water Sales-resklertial 2,294,377 2,018.500 681,500 33.8% 97(?QS? 951,500 47.1% Water Sales-commercial 438,097 418,000 5'11)iIQR= 92 000 22.0°,6 6 f2 i)Q0 194,000 46.4°,6 Wastewater Sales 237,213 270,454f3 QQ( 89,546 331% 432tX>D 161,546 59.7°,6 Sanitation Sales 296,252 320.000 :;;: _ _> 35000; 15,000 4.7°,6 ::; _is ;432 0.: 112,000 35.0% .-I.......I............... :............ ......_.................... _.... .......I................. __....._.. ..........._.............. .._......... Other Utility Charges 297,390 197,078 337;5013: 140,422 71 3% 39T;171)0; 193,922 98.4% Interest Income 101,779 86.040 :..:::: 7 101,700 11$. °6r .::.:::: ;222 154 hi$. I _...... Total Revenues $9 617 722 $9,517.036 ;;511 791841 $2,274,805 23.9% $14 485 420: $4 968 384 52,2[s EXPENDITURES City Secretary $143,026 $200,879 S21g,004 $18,121 9.0°,6 $194598 ($6,281 -3.1% City Manager 152,073 178,078 193, 14,947 8 4% 314 533 136,455 76.6% Economic Development 0 0 p 0 0.0% 1t7245.' 117,245 100.0% Support Services 502-644 602109 32.271 5A% 642;785 40.676 tz.81(t General Gov Total $797.743 $981,066 SA gd6 $6•�,339 6.7% t1,268161 $288 095 29.4% Finance 205,844 261,83856,09Q (5,748 •2 2°,6 265fi40 3,802 1.5°.6 Municipal Court 144,786 168,605 ...........:: 1 -0.8% ... ......ZS)30 35.385 2L0°bt _.............. _. ....... ..._._.......... _......... ....._ Finance Total $350,630 $430,443 423�273 -1.7% ' ; S4fi 630 $39 187 9.1% Fire 566,832 720,144 723,144 3,000 0.4% 784663 64.519 9.0°A Police 895,343 1.024,789 1028989 4,200 0.4% 1,249070 224,281 21.9% Public Safety Support 357,268 439,410 44 12 $40 0,2 6t # 250.670 57.0% Public Safety Total $1,819,443 $2,184,343 52192343 $8 000 0.4X 32 723 813 $539,470 24.7% Building Inspections 154,005 258,492 259491 999 04% 375155 116,663 45.1% Streets/Drainage 857,494 1,417,086 1441,30l 24.215 1.7% 997072 (420,014) -29.60/a Parks and Recreation 154,220 717,174 900,Og4 182,910 25.5% 395190 (321,984) -44.9% Public Works Admin 102,064 121,405 i28233 4,828 4 0°,6 360495 239,090 196.9% Water 1,879,712 1,850,369 2;478,42v 628,056 339% 2,748041 897,672 48.5% Wastewater 428,582 887,178 68892t (198,25 -22.3% 901797 14,619 1.6% Sanitation 263.050 288,000 304 16,500 5.Z°be 388 800 100,800 35.0% Public Works Total $3,839,127 $5,539 704 $6l19g955 $659,251 11.9% 56166 550 $626,846 11.3% Community Dev.Total $234,170 $273,625 $19 687 7.2°k $371:712 $98,087 35.8% Transfer4nterfund 267,295 269,613 269,6i3 0 0.0% 1,551394 1,281,781 475.4% Other 24,072 25,000 2500(J. 0 0.0°,6 0 (25.000) -100.0% Debt Service 966,563 1.391 725 1570,263:: 178,538 12.8% 1.925 343 533,618 38.3% Total Expenditures $8,299,043 $11,095 519 S=9.164 $923,645 8.3% S14.477,�03 3,382,084 30.5% Net Revenues $1.318.679 $1,351,160 57 817 Proceeds from C.O.sale $0 $1,040,000 $18293,742 $253,742 $414,180 ($625,820 C.O.Payment $0 ($155,000) ($155000) $0 $0 $155,000 Transfer to Infrastructure Net Revenues $1,318,679 5911.419 $1 604.902 $295.454 Beginning Fund Balance $1.956,492 $3.170,120 $3,170,120 : $4,081;539 Reserved Fund Balance ($105,051 $0 $0; $0 Ending Fund Balance S3 170.120 S2.476.637 ij S3•0-3.= 7,!! ~/< CONSOLIDATED GENERAL FUND AND DEBT SERVICE FUND REVISED 1993-94 BUDGET and PROPOSED 1994-95 BUDGET 95sumaW.wk4 $.455/$100 .. 1993-94 1994-95 Adopted $45515 I00>#>`: $Increase/ 1993-94 :44$l$1 '> $Increase) 1994-95 ................. ........................... ............................ ............................ ........................ 1992-93 1993 sa $ ? (Decrease) %Increase/ '(9 $5 (Decrease) %Increaset ................... REVENUES Actual Budget R 1 5ed<`:: Adopted -Decrease ?: f .......5.. >: Adopted -Decrease Ad Valorem Taxes $2,981,048 $3,285,361 3�2y63 ($29,198 -0.9% ; ; 3 $48E1Q $499,619 15.2% Sales Tax 636,737 701,500 »> 163 500 23.3% '1`23330 531,500 75.8% ...... ..........QDd ............................ ...................... ............................ ..................... ...............-......... ...................... ........................... ....._................... Franchise Fees 305,909 336.400 >>:< 3 k25 61,725 18.3% ;>';> 8{ 0 81,640 24.3% .. ........ .......................:.:. ................... ............................ ; . . 424f30 10,960 4.7%960 0.4%Fine 182,271 231, 0 ''` < > ; : �Char es for Services 59,087 57.2 ' flf0` 6 295 11.0% ::" 22,750 39.76 ennit 25 288 1 OSS 000 474 020 43.6% ". 853350 78.4% P s(Fees 1, 1, 1,;47., 5r7. Miscellaneous 44,847 17,940 s>? ': 18,235 101.6% : .`«':<>< 17;�JCi 23,810 132.7% _..................... ............................ Transfer-Interfund 267,295 421.613 >> .i'"T 6 3; 155,000 36.8% :€ 3'6fi4;&( 243,227 57.7°,6 Interest Income 66,234 60,000 51.500 55.444 91.7% ...I..............--..... ............................ ........................ ................ .... ........................... Total Revenues $5,784,716 $6,199,504 ;EOl54 $902,037 14.6X 852a'3fi0 $2,321,856 37.5% EXPENDITURES City secretary $143,026 $200,879 ;219,t)0 $18,121 90% ` 194�5J8 ($6,281 -3.1% City Manager 152,073 178.078 t93,f>25: 14,947 8 4% 314 533 136,455 76.6% Economic Development 0 0 tl 0 0 0% 11? 4,5 117,245 100.0°,G Support Services 502.544140 ... ..: � 32.271 ...:........ 40.676 6.8°i6 a,....,...... General Gov Total $797,743 $981,066 ;;::;< � ;c&5.$,3,2 S '` $2$$,0$5 2;2.4/� . Finance 205,844 261,838 `�& } (5,748 -22°� ....<:.::;;;2F5Q 3,802 1.5% Municipal Court 144,786 168,605 ,1$, -0.8% . 35,385 21.0% Finance Total $350,630 $430,443 3d?3.273: ].ZYa ; .1$Z $11e Fire 566,832 720,144 ?23,144 3,000 0 4% ...... 784f # 64,519 9.0°,6 Police 895,343 1.024,789 ; ; > 1 ..:...'..:...: 4,200 0.4% 4 2+ i13�I 224,281 21.9°,6 ,.:. Public Safety Support 357,268 439,410 ......: 250,670 57.0% Public Safety Total $1,819,443 $2,184,343 S2,1=- 43 $8,000 0.4X 21811 $539,470 24.7% Building Inspections 154.005 258,492 259,491 999 0 4°,6 37�155. 116,663 45.1°,6 Streets/Drainage 857,494 1.417,086 1441,301: 24,215 1 7% 99 07 (420,014 -29.6% Parks and Recreation 138,224 196.307 22652? 30,215 15.4% 264�60 67,853 34.6°,6 Public Works Admin 102,064 121,405 4.$2l} 4.0X .> 3 :4 239000 19.9% Public Works Total $1,251,787 $1,993,290 ,053�847; $60.257 3.0% St 89:&8$2_ $$,592 4.2Ya Community Dev.Total $234,170 $273,625293 392_ $19,687 7 2% $3711;742 $98,087 35.8% Debt service G.O.Bonds 886,844 1,309,830 # 178 538 1 °6t 234.528 21Z6t .._. ......._ _:..._....... ...._.... _..........._ _.. .............__..... _....................... Total Expenditures $5,340,617 $7,172,597 $7497448i $324,651 4 5X ? $8,47.5;71&; 1,253,109 17.5% Net Revenues $454,099 $577,386 #95 654 51.068.747 Proceeds from C.O.Sale $0 $720,000 j720;827 $827 4414100 ($305,820 C.O.Payment $0 ($155,000):...,... ($155,000) $0 $0: $155,000 Transfer to Infrastructure $0 $0 4.140; $0 ($820,026 Net Revenues $454,099 51.7pol20 $57&213 $97,901 Beginning Fund Balance $1.265,833 $1.614,881 $1,614,881; $1,T85,fl1?f Reserve Fund Balance ($105,051) $0 $0 40: Ending Fund Balance $1,614,881 S1,206.788 S1,7.K001 :1 GENERAL FUND REVISED 1993-94 BUDGET and PROPOSED 1994-95 BUDGET 95sumal6.wk4 $.455/$100 1993-94 1994-95 Adopted 455/5100..; $Increaset 1993-9a A491S1o0 $Increase) 1994-95 ................ ......._..... ................... _..................__. 1992-93 1993-94 <;I9:9 94 (Decrease) %Increase/ 199: 95> (Decrease) %Increase/ REVENUES-- - Actual BudgeteYIS Adopted -Decrease Ff0':; ;;ald Adopted -Decrease Ad Valorem Taxes $2.144,651 $2,204,198 ;;'; ?K7v00C ($29,198 -1.3% << <+5232fr $121,752 5.5% .....................:...... ......:....... ........................... .............. ............................ ............................ Sales Tax 636.737 701.500 :'; 6a 163,500 23.3% t2 itXIO 531,500 75.8% Franchise Fees 305,909 336,400 ;398x1 61,725 183°,6 t$,t10 81,640 24.3% ............................ ......................... .......................... ___........_...... ....._................. .....-_....._........... Fines 182,271 231,440 :<>>> ODQ 960 0.4% ;; >: 2 2 00 10,960 4.7% :::.:..r Charges for Services 59.087 57.250 6,295 11 0% 80flt30 22,750 39.7% Permits/Fees 1,251,288 1,088,000 `:....:. .:`:.. 474,020 43.6% k A41 _...:; 853 350 78.4% s� . Miscellaneous 44,847 17,940 ?.X 175 18,235 101 6% +t1,750 23,810 132.7% Transfer-Utility Fund 159,446 159,446 ..:.::::::;:l59 49_ 0 0.0% .;:.;:.;:;:.;:;4;3G 050 336,914 211.3% .............. ..................... Interest Income 54.]�4 54.4QQ ..............;' ':.: = 40,000 �.49ft: ;>::;:>:::' E` 40,000 80.0% Total Revenues $4.838,430, $4,846,174 $5t # 4 $735,537 15.2% 6ti6885Q $2,022,676 41.7% FYPFNr]ITIrRFS ' " - City Secretary $143,026 $200,879 1 ;f10IJ $18,121 9 0% 1# 598 ($6,281 -3.1% . City Manager 152,073 178,078 _; 93..Q25. 14,947 8 4% ;,: _:114.. ........................... _ _......._........ Economic Development 0 0 0 0 0 0% 117245 117,245 100.0% Support Services 502,644 602,109 32,271 5.421 W.785i 40,676 General Gov Total $797,743 $981,066 51 ,405 $65,339 6.7% St.269. $288,095 29.4% Finance 205,844 261,8385E+09G (5,748 -2.2% 2656aQ 3,802 1.5°4 Municipal Court 144,786 168,6 -0.8°� Q 3,5,E 21.0% Finance Total $350 630 $430,443 -1.7°� �&,Q $39 187 9.1% Fire 566,832 720,144 72%14/t 3,000 0.4% 7X.663 64,519 9.0°,6 Police 895,343 1,024,789 1 2S 989 4,200 0.4% 4..249 070 224.281 21.9% Public Safety Support 357-268 439,410 , ¢ $QQ 0.2% 250,670 57.0% Public Safety Total $1,819,443 $2,184,343 $8,000 t21223 81 $539,470 24.7% Building Inspections 154,005 258,492 259+491. 999 0.4% 375155 116,663 45.1% Streets/Drainage 857,494 1,417,086 1441+301 24,215 1.7% 997,072 (420,014) -29.6% Parks and Recreation 138,224 196,307 226522 30,215 15.4% 264160 67,853 34.6% Public Works Admin 102,064 121,405 4,828 4.0% MA95 239,090 196.9% Public Works Total $1,251,787 $1,993 290 S M53 a242; $60,257 3.0% 57:996ai82 $3,592 0.2% Community Dev.Total $234,170 $273,625 S2g3.3°I2 $19,687 7.2% $371 712' $98,087 35.8% ................ _ Total Expenditures $4,453,773 $5,862,767 S6;flOB88i1 $146,113 2.5% 56,8311198: $968,431 16.5% Net Revenues $384,657 $589,424 137,651 $1,054,245 Proceeds from C.O.sale $0 $720,000 $720,82 . $827 $414180 ($305,820 C.O.Payment $0 ($155,000 f$155000 $0 $0 $155,000 Transfer to Infrastructure Net Revenues $3$4,657 $ $590,251 $83,399 Beginning Fund Balance $1,125.708 $1,405,314 $1 OS. 314. $1543,972 Reserved Fund Balance ($105,051) $0 $0: $0 Ending Fund Balance $.1 405 314 $953-721 SL543 972: S,175 778. Fund balance percentage-GY 31.55% 16.27% _ 25 69%> 11©-i3 DEBT SERVICE FUND REVISED 1993-94 BUDGET and PROPOSED 1994-95 BUDGET 95sumai6.wk4 s.a55/s100 .., 1993 94 1994-95 Adopted . 10II:?; $Increase/ 1993-94 :4d9/ 1 S Increase/ 1994-95 455i 1992-93 1993-94 >�9.94> >> Decrease) %Increase/ '< 1f994e9 (Decrease) %Increase/ ....................... REVENUES Actual Budget Adopted -Decrease t4 ed -Decrease Ad Valorem Taxes $836,397 $1,081,163 €€; Bl*tfi# $0 0.0°,G ;3 4al Q $377.867 35.0% Interest Income 12,040 10,0001 sue. 11,500 115 0°� 25; Qt1. 15,000 150.0% Operating Transfer In 107,849 262,167 ::.. :::;:`:> l Z 155.000 59.1% ,;::.:.,.lE$ 4 -35.7% Total Revenues $956,286 $1,353,330 8M $ 8t1 $166,600 12.3% ':;81 tr52 b t $299,180 22.1% ............ YPFNt11T11RF F S Principal $240,000 $340,000 0*— $130,000 38.2% [ SxG ;t?00 $360,000 105.9% Interest 413292 721,882 »» ' t$ 48,038 6.7% 54i1 (80,959 -11.2% _. . Admin.Expenses 1,691 1,500 °.: ::: :'.:: ,€lQ(f 500 333% taW: 500 0.0% Debt Service-TRA bonds 231,861 246.44$ : ;> 4 4.9�e ;;`,:. :? 1', ........................... _ ..__....._........ ............................ _._ __............... _.......................... _................ Total Expenditures $886,844 $1,309,830 € 89-88388 $178,538 13.6X <S[59± 5t)8 $284,678 21.7% .... . Nat Revenues S69.442 $43.500 >,<::::>:::'S4 i B SI112: 514.502 Beginning Fund Balance $140,125 $209,567 S2t79,567 5241,0 9 Ending Fund Balance S209,56,7 S253.067 UTILITY FUND REVISED 1993-94 BUDGET and PROPOSED 1994-95 BUDGET 95sumal6.wk4 1993-94 1994-95 Adopted $Increase/ 1993 94 $Increase/ 1994-95 1992-93 1993-94 1993-84 (Decrease) %Increase/ `1994-95 (Decrease) %Increase/ REVENUES Actual Budget eYJ[S�'d::::: Adopted -Decrease Fro :.;:S4I Adopted -Decrease Miscellaneous $75,380 $17,500 ;..... : $39,100 223.4% 1 Q $34.100 194.9% Interest)Income 30118 24 000 ;; ....> ' 41 000 170.8% > > ..... , 04 ........... 5,{i(IQ 51,000 212.5% Water Sales-residential 2,294,377 2,018.500 '< 5~ 70QA04 681,500 33.8°,62>9700; 951500 47.1% Water Salescommerdal 438,097 418,000 ::::z::;; #;OD(} 92,000 22.0% f 2{X10 194.000 46.4% Sewer Sales 237,213 270,454 „: 6t#FDDf# 89,546 33.1% ... ' 00. 161,546 59.7% Sanitation Sales 296,252 320 000 >':zr< 35 )LiQ 15,000 4.7% >> > .;:.;:;:S1t10 112,000 35.0° Other utility diarges 297,390 1$Z4Z$ ::<::<:.:,:: 140.422 71.3%> e► 1.iiS1 . 193,922 98.4,E Total Revenues $3,668,827 $3,265,532 OQ $1,098,668 33.6X 34 G3bQt $1,698,068 52.0% FYPFNCFS 011»r $24,072 $25,000 425 0013 $0 0 0% Debt servk e.Rannus Bonds 79,719 81.895 $1,$8;i: 0 0 0% $'S25 (3,370) -4.1% Water 1.879.712 1,850,369 2,t78 425: 628,056 33 9°� .::..:. Z14.8 U4� 897,672 48.5°� Sewer 428,582 887,178 888821: (198,25 -22.3% 901797; 14,619 1.6% Sanitation 263,050 288,000 0450b: 16.500 5 7% .. 388,ElU0 100,800 35.0% opeatins Transfer out 267,295 269,613 2�3� 1,030,471 382.2% Total Expenses $2.942.430 ;3.402.055 z$48.354 $446,299 13 1% $2,016,192 59.2% Net Revenues $726,397 3136,52S515.746 $652,269 Beginning fund balance $585,579 $1,311,976 $1;317 976 $1 827.722 Ending fund balance ;1 311 976 S1 175.453 $1 27_722 374.075 SPECIAL REVENUE FUND Parks/Recreation REVISED 1993-94 BUDGET and PROPOSED 1994-95 BUDGET 95sumal6.wk4 1993-94 1994-95 Adopted $Increase! 1993 94 $Increase/ 1994-95 1992-93 1993-94 }�94 ;> Decrease %Increase/ ' .5' Decrease( ) 190445 ( ) %Increase/ REVENUES Actual-- Budget eYlSed.;:::..... Adopted -Decrease ..... ::.:..:..:..::: Adopted -Decrease Permita/Fees $147,544 550,000 3` $ 5 $105,000 210.0% `' ' aItTQQ $50,000 100.0% Miscellaneous 1.208 0 :`p 0 0.0 % 0 0.0°,6 Interest $,427 2.�4 ...:. :;;... . 4 700 2 .0� 7 282.5% .. . Total Revenues $154,179 $52,000tGi*7D0 $109,700 211.0% 'I ;f>5f) $50,000 96.2% EXPENDITURES IRPS XP Professional Services $0 $0 $Y $0 0 0°,6 :? '$'20,fl00 $20,000 100.0% Parks and Recreation 0 4,000 .::::.;;::;.a7x $G 138,486 3462.2% 18,000 450.0% Park Improvements15 996 49157 ' g::.;•;;::_ 0 0.0°,6 ``<>;; ......>::. - ° ,'(5 1,M. (7,80 15.9,E Land 4 467,710 :::>::>.::>::>:> 67 $957 104.4de `<>:: >::::: ::> 100.0% ..... Total Expenditures $15,996 $520,867 ;16♦AIO $144,443 27 7% $8Silo. ($437,51 -84.0% Net Revenues $138.183 ($468,867 5503 610 ($34,743 2#300: $493 167 c....:.. Proceeds from C.O.Sale $0 $320,000 $320.00a: : Beginning Fund Balance $105,080 !M1,263 Endkg Fund Balance $243,263 S94 396 �O- i� SPDC - OPERATING FUND �✓ Parks/Recreation REVISED 1993-94 BUDGET and PROPOSED 1994-95 BUDGET 95sumal6.wk4 1993-94 199495 Adopted $Increase/ 1993-94 $Increase/ 199495 1992-93 1993-94 1�934 (Decrease) %Increase/ ,994-95 (Decrease) %Increase/ REVENUES Actual Budget #3eYlsed::: ;`.:: Adopted -Decrease _ :.p�nposed:::;;:: Adopted -Decrease _:............ . ................:....... Sales Tax $0 $0 $16.G . $160,000 100.0% 3618.$Qd $616,500 100.0% Interest 12 4 1.� 100.0% ; 12,500 100.0% Total Revenues $O $O 3i6i $161,500 100 0% 629OK $616,500 100.0% ................ ........... _......................... _..._.._ ............ ._..-......_._....I.... _..__.. .......... EXPENDITURES 0 Personnel 252 100.0% «;=> `> `_ :7:::.` 7680 100.0,E Operations 0 0 O 0 100 04,E ty 0 100.04,E Capital 4 4 .......................1 : Q 100-0% .:::................ ,.. 4 144.1 Total Expenditures $0 $O ,252< $8,252 1000% S47fi$tt $47,680 100.0% Net Revenues $O $O 5153,248 $153,248 $581.320 5581;520: Transfer to Debt service 0 0 0 251311] Proceeds from C.O.sale 0 0 0` fl Beginning Fund Balance $0 $0 a153 248: Ending Fund Balance (W 7© -! 7 SPDC - DEBT SERVICE FUND (W Parks/Recreation REVISED 1993-94 BUDGET and PROPOSED 1994-95 BUDGET 95sumal6.wk4 1993-94 1994-95 Adopted $Increase/ 1993-94 $Increase/ 1994-95 1992-93 1993-94 1993�4 (Decrease) %Increase/ 1994$5 (Decrease) %Increase/ _.:..................... REVENUES Actual Budget .. Re+nsed: .. Adopted -Decrease propo;s;ed Adopted -Decrease Operating Transfer In $0 $0 X$.G $0 0 0°,6 3 1;31:Q $251,310 100.0% Interest Income Q Q ,QQQ 100.0% }Q 12,500 100.0% Total Revenues $0 $O $3,00Q: $3,000 100.0% $26321.0. $263,810 100.0% FYPF111r]iT11RFS . Principal $o $o $t $0 100.0°,650;flW $50,000 100.0% Interest 0 0 0 0 100.0°,6 201, t0 201,310 100.0°,6 Admin. _ . . Expenses Q 4 ... 4 100.0% `: 1.44Q 14Q41Se Total Expenditures $0 $O ti0 $0 100.0% 42a;310 $252,310 100.0% Net Revenues $0 $O 3;000: $3,000 ;1a;500 $11,500 Proceeds from bond sale $0 $0 $257,915 Transfer from sPDc operating $0 Beginning Fund Balance $0 $0 $G $255,915 Ending Fund Balance $Q ,�Q 5255915, SZ67415 �v Yl U CAPITAL PROJECTS PROPOSED 1994-95 BUDGET 1 FY93-94 FY93-94 FY94-95 FY92-93 To Date Actual Budget ALL FUNDS Actual 7/31/94 Estimated Proposed Revenues/Other Sources Interest Income 121,287 204,668 243,906 361,250 Bond Proceeds 2,800,000 5,623,457 5.623,457 5,300,000 Transfer in-Other Funds 0 0 0 1,570,026 Fees 587,977 758,591 922,591 1,041,000 Assessment Income 11,228 5,922 6,098 1,060 Developer Participation 250,175 79,825 79,825 0 Carroll ISD Participation 0 0 0 30,000 City of Keller Participation 0 12.049 12.049 40,353 Total Revenues/Other Sources 3,770,667 6,684,512 6,887,926 8,343,689 Expenditures Water/Sewer Projects 1993 Water Bond Projects ($1.3 million) 241,698 984,262 1,082,508 142,456 Water Impact Fee Fund 17,835 152,000 232,000 321,975 Sewer Impact Fee Fund 177,134 293,951 355,396 1,307,500 Waterworks Improvements Fund 0 0 0 993,740 1995 Water Bond Projects ($2.5 million) 0 0 0 596,000 Sewer Assessment Fund 0 0 0 1,300,000 Subtotal-Water/Sewer Projects 436,667 1,430,213 0,213 1,669,904 4,661,671 Streets/Drainage Projects 1993 Street Bond Projects($1.5 million) 308,614 261,942 279,596 1,023,791 1994 Street Bond Projects($3 million) 0 74,134 80,000 2,468,000 Perimeter Road Fee Fund 0 0 33,000 0 Infrastructure Reserve Fund 0 0 0 840,526 Subtotal-Streets/Drainage Projects 308,614 336,076 392,596 4,332,317 Parks Projects SPDC Revenue Bond Projects 0 52 3.651 936,651 2,635,963 Total Expenditures 745.281 2.019.940 2.999.151 11.629.951 Net Revenues 3,025,386 4,664,572 3,888,775 (3,286,262) Beginning Fund Balance 724,772 3,750,158 3,750,158 7,638,933 Ending Fund Balance -75� .414�.730 7 6,�$933 4.352.671 CAPITAL PROJECTS PROPOSED 1994-95 BUDGET � w 2 FY93-94 FY93-94 FY94-95 FUND 757-$1.3 MILLION FY92-93 To Date Actual Budget 1993 WATER BOND PROJECTS Actual 7/31194 Estimated Proposed Revenues Bond Proceeds(11/92) 1,300,000 0 0 0 Interest earnings 39,699 24,561 24,561 5,000 Developer Participation (Oakwood Estates) 35,000 10,000 10,000 0 Keller Participation-Beach Str 0 12,049 12.049 40,353 Total Revenue/Sources of Funds 1,374,699 46,610 46,610 45,353 Expenditures Engineering contract 75,151 46,588 60,000 0 Water line-FM1709 west(Bal. of contract) 6,291 0 0 0 Water line-N. White Chapel (Oakwood) 160,256 0 0 0 Pearson Lane Pumps 0 19,274 19,274 0 12" High-Pressure 0 423,793 470,881 0 8" Peytonville (Cont-FM1709)12" Cont./TWKi 0 243,753 271,171 0 Shady Lane water line improvements 0 0 0 142,456 Beach Street Pumps/Upgrade-Keller pump station 0 250,854 261,182 0 Total Expenditures 241,698 984,262 1,082,508 142,456 Net Revenues 1,133,001 (937,652) (1,035,898) (97,103) Beginning Fund Balance 0 1,133,001 1,133,001 97,103 Ending Fund Balance 1.133.001 195,349 97.103 Q k 7,�9,2_0 CAPITAL PROJECTS PROPOSED 1994-95 BUDGET 3 FY93-94 FY93-94 FY94-95 FUND 751 FY92-93 To Date Actual Budget WATER IMPACT FEES Actual 7/31/94 Estimated Proposed Revenues Impact fee receipts 243,000 271,900 331,900 390,000 CISD participation-Shady Oaks 12"water line 0 0 0 30,000 Interest Earnings 12,362 16,163 20,163 35.000 Total Revenues 255,362 288,063 352,063 455,000 Expenditures Impact fee update 17,835 0 0 0 Construction-Kimball water line 0 0 70,000 72,570 Engineering-Kimball water line 0 0 10,000 4,650 Shady Oaks 12"water line (CISD) 0 0 0 130,000 Transfer to Debt Service-$1.3M C.O. 0 152,000 152,000 114,755 Total Expenditures 17,835 152,000 232,000 321,975 Net Revenues 237,527 136,063 120,063 133,025 Beginning Fund Balance 230,247 467,774 467,774 587,837 Ending Fund Balance 457.774 603"837 587.837 725 $6 ��; -ter CAPITAL PROJECTS PROPOSED 1994-95 BUDGET 4 FY93-94 FY93-94 FY94-95 FUND 752 FY92-93 To Date Actual Budget SEWER IMPACT FEES Actual 7/31/94 Estimated Proposed Revenues Impact fee receipts 315,112 436,678 516,678 575,000 Interest Earnings 17,362 23,468 29,468 37,500 Developer contributions 215,175 69,825 69.825 0 Total Revenues 547,649 529,971 615,971 612,500 Expenditures S-2 Sewer line easements 18,950 0 0 0 Engineering-S-2 Sewer line (BearCr/1709) 15,220 5,246 6,500 0 Construction-S-2 Sewer line(BearCr/1709) 142,964 249,137 303,896 0 Engineering-S2A Sewer line (1709/Flor.) 0 0 0 50,000 Construction- S2A Sewer line (1709/Flor.) 0 0 0 404,500 Engineering- N-5 Sewer line 0 0 0 39,350 Construction- N-5 Sewer line 0 0 0 310,650 Construction- N-4 Sewer line 0 0 0 500,000 Engineering-N-4 Sewer line 0 39.568 45.000 3.000 Total Expenditures 177,134 293,951 355,396 1,307,500 Net Revenues 370,515 236,020 260,575 (695,000) Beginning Fund Balance 250,122 620,637 620,637 881,212 Ending Fund Balance 620.637 881.212 18 CAPITAL PROJECTS PROPOSED 1994-95 BUDGET 5 FY93-94 FY93-94 FY94-95 FUND 750 FY92-93 To Date Actual Budget WATERWORKS IMPROVEMENTS FUND Actual 7/31194 Estimated Proposed Revenues: Transfer in from Utility Fund 0 0 0 750,000 Interest Income 4.964 7.359 8.959 35,000 Total Revenues 4,964 7,359 8,959 785,000 Expenditures: Marshall Creek Sewer Line participation 0 0 0 243,740 Water/Sewer system improvements 0 0 0 670,000 Land-elevated water storage site 0 0 0 80,000 Total Expenditures 0 0 0 993,740 Net Revenues 4,964 7,359 8,959 (208,740) Beginning Fund Balance 224,617 229,581 229,581 238,540 Ending Fund Balance �1 240 238.540 29.$04 %-,2,3 CAPITAL PROJECTS PROPOSED 1994-95 BUDGET 6 FY93-94 FY93-94 FY94-95 FY92-93 To Date Actual Budget 1995 WATER BOND PROJECTS Actual 3 94 Estimated Proposed Revenues/Other Sources Bond Proceeds(4/95) 0 0 0 2,500,000 Interest Income 0 0 0 47,000 Total Revenues/Other Sources 0 0 0 2,547,000 Expenditures Engineering 0 0 0 196,000 Ground Storage Tank-5 million gallons 0 0 0 400,000 Total Expenditures 0 0 0 596,000 Net Revenues/Other Sources 0 0 0 1,951,000 Beginning Fund Balance 0 0 0 0 Ending Fund Balance Q Q Q 1.951.000 CAPITAL PROJECTS PROPOSED 1994-95 BUDGET 7 FY93-94 FY93-94 FY94-95 FUND 755 FY92-93 To Date Actual Budget SEWER ASSESSMENT FUND Actual 751/94 Estimated Proposed Revenues/Other Sources Bond proceeds 0 0 0 1,300,000 Transfer In-Utility Fund 0 0 0 0 Assessment Income 11,228 5,922 6,098 1,060 Interest Income 1.068 1.261 1.511 37,500 Tota Revenues 12,296 7,183 7,609 1,338,560 E2=nditures Neighborhood Assessment Program (yr. 1) 0 0 0 1,300,000 Net Revenues 12,296 7,183 7,609 38,560 Beginning Fund Balance 19,786 32,082 32,082 39,691 Ending Fund Balance $ 39.265 39.691 78.251 CAPITAL PROJECTS PROPOSED 1994-95 BUDGET 8 FY93-94 FY93-94 FY94-95 FUND 703-$1.5 MILLION FY92-93 To Date Actual Budget 1993 STREET BOND PROJECTS Actual 7131/94 Estimated Proposed Revenues Bond Proceeds (11192) 1,500,000 0 0 0 Interest income 45,265 36.736 41.736 25,000 Total Revenues/Sources of Funds 1,545,265 36,736 41,736 25,000 Expenditures Engineering contract 135.339 46,779 55,000 10,000 Administrative expenses(bond issuance) 24,437 0 0 0 N. Carroll-DoveBumey 148,838 42,643 52,075 0 N. Carroll-SH114/13ove 0 86,158 86,158 463,661 N. Carroll-FM1 709/SH1 14 0 0 0 392,763 S. Peytonville Road-FM1709/Continental 0 86,363 86.363 157,367 Total Expenditures 308,614 261,942 279,596 1,023,791 Net Revenues 1,236,651 (225,206) (237,860) (998,791) Beginning Fund Balance 0 1,236,651 1,236,651 998,791 Ending Fund Balance 1-230.651 1.011.445 998,721 Q 70-Z& CAPITAL PROJECTS PROPOSED 1994-95 BUDGET (w 9 FY93-94 FY93-94 FY94-95 FUND 700-$3.0 MILLION FY92-93 To Date Actual Budget 1994 STREET BOND PROJECTS Actual 7131/94Estimated Proposed Revenues Bond Proceeds(11/93) 0 3,000,000 3,000,000 0 Interest Income 0 79,638 96,638 75,000 Miscellaneous income 0 1, 337 1,137 0 Total Revenue/Sources of Funds 0 3,080,775 3,097,775 75,000 Expenditures Engineering contract 0 74,134 80,000 93,000 Brumlow-Continental/SH26 0 0 0 270,000 S. Carroll-1709/Continental 0 0 0 325,000 E. Dove-White Chapel/Carroll 0 0 0 325,000 E. Dove-Carroll/Kimball 0 0 0 575,000 N.White Chapel-1709/114 0 0 0 555,000 S. White Chapel-Continental/1709 0 0 0 325,000 Total Expenditures 0 74,134 80,000 2,468,000 Net Revenues 0 3,006,641 3,017,775 (2,393,000) Beginning Fund Balance 0 0 0 3,017,775 Ending Fund Balance 4 3.006.641 3,017.775 624.775 CAPITAL PROJECTS PROPOSED 1994-95 BUDGET (w 10 FY93-94 FY93-94 FY94-95 Fund 502 FY92-93 To Date Actual Budget PERIMETER ROAD FEE FUND Actual 7/31/94 Estimated Proposed Revenues Perimeter Road Fees 29,865 48,876 72,876 76,000 Interest income 567 2.270 2M 5,000 Total Revenues 30,432 51,146 75,746 81,000 Expenditures E. Continental (Timarron/Dominion participati 0 0 33 0 Total Expenditures 0 0 33,000 0 Net Revenues 30,432 51,146 42,746 81,000 Beginning Fund Balance 0 30,432 30,432 73,178 Ending Fund Balance 30.432 81.578 73.178 1:54,178 �o�g CAPITAL PROJECTS PROPOSED 1994-95 BUDGET 11 FY93-94 FY93-94 FY94-95 FUND 501 FY92-93 To Date Actual Budget INFRASTRUCTURE RESERVE FUND Actual 7/31/94 Estimated Propgsed Revenues Transfer in-General Fund 0 0 0 820,026 Interest Income 0 Q 0 20,500 Total Revenues/Other Sources 0 0 0 840,526 Expenditures Kimball Road 0 0 0 400,000 Randol Mill-1709 to Kingswood (County) 0 0 0 103,100 Vista Trails (Contractor) 0 0 0 163,000 Ridgecrest(County) 0 0 0 93,926 Summer Place drainage improvements 0 0 0 60,000 Engineering-Continental/SH26 RR crossing 0 0 0 20,500 Total Expenditures 0 0 0 840,526 Net Revenues 0 0 0 0 Beginning Fund Balance 0 0 0 0 Ending Fund Balance 0 0 0 0 CAPITAL PROJECTS PROPOSED 1994-95 BUDGET (W 12 FY93-94 FY93-94 FY94-95 Fund 302 FY92-93 To Date Actual Budget SPDC REVENUE BOND PROJECTS Actual 7/31/94 Estimated Proposed Revenues/Other Sources Bond Proceeds 0 2,623,457 2,623,457 1,500,000 Interest income 0 13.212 18,000 38,750 Total Revenues/Other Sources 0 2,636,669 2,641,457 1,538,750 Expenditures Joint Use Improvements-Gymnasium 0 0 500,000 0 Bicentennial Park-Phase I Land Acquisition 0 253,651 253,651 0 Site Grading 0 0 50,000 0 Entry Road-drainage 0 0 133,000 0 Ball fields 4 &5 0 0 0 174,600 Fields 6 &7 0 0 0 261,400 Parking Lot Development/Utilities 0 0 0 470,055 Recreational Amenities 0 0 0 491,910 Soccer Area 0 0 0 19,000 Maintenance Building 0 0 0 100,000 Contingency 0 0 0 118,998 U.S. Corp of Engineer Property 0 0 0 1,000,000 (W Total Expenditures 0 253,651 936.651 2,635,963 Net Revenues/Other Sources 0 2,383,018 1,704,806 (1,097,213) Beginning Fund Balance 0 0 0 1,704,806 Ending Fund Balance 0 2.383.018 04.806 607.593 r City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM September 1, 1994 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Lou Ann Heath, Director of Finance SUBJECT: Ordinance 623 - FY1994-95 Tax Rate The FY1994-95 budget proposes a tax rate decrease of$.006 from $.455 to $.449 er $100 of valuation. Ordinance 623 establishes the $.449 rate with the allocation o .27285 for maintenance and operations and$.17615 for debt service for the tax year 1994. Taxes are billed October 1, are due December 31, and become delinquent after January 31, 1995. Delinquent tax incurs a penalty of 6% for the first month plus 1% for each additional month up to a maximum of 12%. Interest accrues at a rate of 1% per month on delinquent taxes. The ordinance also provides a 15% penalty for taxes not paid by July 1, 1995. Tarrant County serves as the City's tax collector. Please place Ordinance 623 on the Council agenda September 6 for approval. LAH ORDINANC O. G23 'aw `r AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS, FIXING AND LEVYING MUNICIPAL AD VALOREM TAXES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING OCTOBER 1, 1994 AND ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 1995, AND FOR EACH YEAR THEREAFTER UNTIL OTHERWISE PROVIDED, AT THE RATE OF $0 .449 PER ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS ($100 . 00) ASSESSED VALUE ON ALL TAXABLE PROPERTY WITHIN THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS, AS OF JANUARY 1, 1994, TO PROVIDE REVENUES FOR THE PAYMENT OF CURRENT EXPENSES AND TO PROVIDE AN INTEREST AND SINKING FUND ON ALL OUTSTANDING DEBTS OF THE CITY; DIRECTING THE ASSESSMENT THEREOF; PROVIDING FOR DUE AND DELINQUENT DATES TOGETHER WITH PENALTIES AND INTEREST THEREON; PROVIDING FOR PLACE OF PAYMENT; PROVIDING FOR APPROVAL OF THE TAX ROLLS PRESENTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL; PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF INCONSISTENT ORDINANCES - PROVIDING FOR A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; ECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREA e City Council of the Southlake, Texas (hereinafter referre ity") hereby finds that the tax for the fiscal year beginning October 1, 1994, and ending September . \,• 30, 1995, hereinafter levied for current expenses of the City and the general improvements of the City and its property must be levied to provide the revenue requirements of the budget for the ensuing year; and WHEREAS, the City Council has approved, by a separate ordinance adopted on the 20th day of September, 1994, the budget for the fiscal year beginning October 1, 1994, and ending September 30, 1995; and WHEREAS, all statutory and constitutional requirements concerning the levying and assessing of ad valorem taxes have been complied with. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS : Section 1 . That all of the above premises are found to be true and correct and are incorporated into the body of t is Ordinance as if copied in their entirety. Section 2 . That there is hereby levied and ordered to e assessed and collected for the fiscal year beginning October 1, 1994, and ending September 30, 1995, and for each fiscal year thereafter until it be otherwise provided by and ordained on all taxable property, real, personal and mixed, situated within the corporate limits of the City of Southlake, Texas, and not exempt from taxation by the Constitution of the State and valid State laws, an ad valorem tax rate of $0 .449 for the general operations of the City on each One Hundred Dollars ($100 . 00) assessed value of Taw taxable property, and shall be apportioned and distributed as follows : a. For the.purpose of defraying the current expenses of the municipal government of the City, a tax of $0 . 27285 on each One Hundred Dollars ($100 . 00) assessed value of all taxable property. b. For the purpose of creating a sinking fund to pay the interest and principal on all outstanding debt of the City, not otherwise provided for, a tax of $0 . 17615 on each one Hundred Dollars ($100 . 00) assessed value of all taxable property, within the City which shall be applied to the payment of such interest and maturities of all outstanding debt. Section 3 . That all ad valorem taxes shall become due and payable on December 31, 1994, and all ad valorem taxes for the year shall become delinquent after January 31, 1994 . There shall be no discount for payment of taxes prior to said January 31, 1995 . A delinquent tax shall incur all penalty and interest authorized by State law Section 33 . 01 of the Property Tax Code, to-wit : a penalty of six percent (61) of the amount of the tax for the first calendar month it is delinquent plus one percent (1%) for each additional month or portion of a month the tax remains unpaid prior to July 1st of the year in which it becomes delinquent . •� fir► Provided, however, a tax delinquent by July 1st incurs a total penalty of twelve percent (12%) of the amount of the delinquent tax without regard to the number of months the tax has been delinquent. A delinquent tax shall also accrue interest at a rate of one percent (1%) for each month or portion of a month the tax remains unpaid. Taxes that remain delinquent on July 1, 1995, incur an additional penalty of fifteen percent (15%) of the amount of taxes, penalty and interest due; such additional penalty is to defray costs of collection due to contract with the City' s attorney pursuant to Section 6 . 30 of the Property Tax Code . Section 4 . Taxes are payable at the office of Tarrant County Tax Collector. The City shall have available all rights and remedies provided by law for the enforcement of the collection of taxes levied under this ordinance. Section 5 . That the tax rolls, as presented to the City Council, together with any supplement thereto, be, and the same are hereby approved. Section 6 . That any and all ordinances, resolutions, rules, regulations, policies or provisions inconsistent or in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby expressly repealed and rescinded to the extent of the inconsistency or conflict . Section 7 . If any section, article, paragraph, sentence, clause, phrase or word in this Ordinance, or application thereto Page 2 Ordinance No. 623 ��— b:0RD-623.TAX/0RDERES/kb any person or circumstances is held invalid or unconstitutional by a Court of competent jurisdiction, such holding shall not affect 'W '%W the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance; and the City Council hereby declares it would have passed such remaining portions of this Ordinance despite such invalidity, which remaining portions shall remain in full force and effect . Section 8 . That the necessity of fixing and levying municipal ad valorem taxes of the City for the next fiscal year as required by the laws of the State of Texas, requires that this Ordinance shall take effect immediately from and after its passage, and it is accordingly so ordained. PASSED AND APPROVED on first reading this day of 1994. Gary Fickes, Mayor ATTEST: Sandra LeGrand City Secretary PASSED AND APPROVED on first reading this day of 1994 . Gary Fickes, Mayor ATTEST: Sandra LeGrand City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney Date: Adopted: Effective : Page 3 Ordinance No. 623 b:ORD-623.TAX/ORDORD4R65/kb r ' ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE DENYING A PROPOSED CHANGE TO THE GENERAL SERVICE RATE TO BE CHARGED FOR SALES OF NATURAL GAS TO RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL CUSTOMERS WITHIN THE CITY OF SOUTHLARE; PROVIDING THAT THIS ORDINANCE SHALL BE CUMULATIVE OF ALL ORDINANCES; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHE I Southlake, Texas is a home ru acting under its charter adopted by the electorate pursuant to Article XI, Section 5 of the Texas Constitution and Chapter 9 of the Local Government Code; and WHEREAS, on May 11, 1994, Lone Star Gas Company filed with the City of Southlake proposed changes to the general service rate to be charged for sales of natural gas to residential and commercial customers within the City of Southlake. , WHEREAS, on May 11, 1994, Lone Star Gas Company filed the same proposal with the Texas Railroad Commission. WHEREAS, the City of Southlake has original jurisdiction over rates charged for natural gas service within its municipal boundaries pursuant to the Texas Gas Utility Regulatory Act, Article 1446(e) , §2 .01(a) . NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLARE, TEXAS: SECTION 1 The said proposed changes to the general service rate to be charged for sales of natural gas to residential and commercial customers is hereby denied. SECTION 2. Nothing in this ordinance shall be construed now or hereafter as limiting or modifying in any manner, the right or power of the �71 _� governing body of this municipality under the law to eegulate the �W rates, operation and services of gas utility services providing service within the City of Southlake. SECTION 3. This ordinance shall be cumulative of all provisions of ordinances of the City of Southlake, Texas, except where the provisions of this ordinance are in direct conflict with the provisions of such ordinances, in which event the conflicting provisions of such ordinances are hereby repealed. SECTION 4. It is hereby declared to be the intention of the City Council that the phrases, clauses, sentences, paragraphs and sections of this ordinance are severable, and if any phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph or section of this ordinance shall be declared unconstitutional by the valid judgment or decree of any court of competent jurisdiction, such unconstitutionality shall not affect any of the remaining phrases, clauses, sentences, paragraphs and sections of this ordinance, since the same would have been enacted by the City Council without the incorporation in this ordinance of any such unconstitutional phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph or section. SECTION 5. 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. %W ' PASSED AND APPROVED ON FIRST READING ON, THIS DAY OF �w , 19 9_ MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY PASSED AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING ON THIS DAY OF 199_ MAYOR ATTEST: A CITY SECRETARY APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: City Attorney Date: ADOPTED: EFFECTIVE: f:\files\md\solake\deny-ord.gas City of Southlake,Texas CITY MANAGER MEMORANDUM J August 30, 1994 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Paul Ward, Building Official Bob Whitehead, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Ordinance No. 622, 2nd Reading, Creating a Building Board of Appeals Ordinance 622 creates the Building Board of Appeals in order to hear and decide appeals of orders made by the Building Official concerning the Uniform Building Code, Uniform Mechanical Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, National Electrical Code, and Ordinance No. 615 for Dangerous and Substandard Buildings. The Building Board of Appeals will consist of five members appointed by the City Council. Qualification of members, organization and duties of the board are provided in this ordinance. The Building Board of Appeals will have no authority or power to waive requirements of the Technical or Administrative Provisions of the codes. Please place Ordinance 622 on the September 6th Council agenda for 2nd reading. Paul Ward Bob Whitehead Attachment wpfiles\memos\ordin.622 ORDINANC 0. 622 (W AN ORDINANCE TING A B LDING BOARD OF APPEALS FOR THE CITY OF SO TE S; PROVIDING FOR APPOINTMENT AND TERMS; PROVID F R QUALIFICATIONS OF MEMBERS; ESTABLISHING DUTIES WERS OF THE BOARD; PROVIDING THAT THIS ORDINANC S BE CUMULATIVE OF ALL ORDINANCES; PROVIDI G A S ILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFE DATE. WHEREAS, the City of S uthlake, Texas is a home city acting under its charter adopted by the electorate pur ant to Article XI, Section 5 of t e Texas Constitution and Chapter 9 of the Local Gov ent Code; and WHEREAS, the City of Southlake has adopted Ordinance No. 615 establishing regulations applicable to dangerous and substandard buildings; and WHEREAS, the City of Southlake has also adopted the Uniform Building Code, Uniform Mechanical Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, Uniform Administrative Code and National Electrical Code; and WHEREAS, the city council now desires to adopt this ordinance creating a Building Board of Appeals for the purpose of exercising jurisdiction over substandard buildings, and hearing and deciding appeals pursuant to the Uniform Building Code, Uniform Mechanical Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, Uniform Administrative Code and National Electrical Code. NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS: SECTION 1. CREATION A Building Board of Appeals, referred to in this ordinance as "the Board," is hereby created to accomplish purposes and perform functions set forth in this ordinance. f.\filcs\muni\slake\ordinanc\building.brd (08-12-94) 7---ep SECTION 2. APPOINTMENT AND TERMS The Board shall be composed of five members to be appointed by the city council. In addition, the city council shall appoint two alternate members who shall serve in the absence of one or more regular members. Alternate members must meet the same qualifications as regular board members. An alternate member has voting privileges only when sitting in for an absent member. Regular members shall be appointed to places numbered 1 through 5 and alternate members shall be appointed to places numbered 6 and 7. Upon initial appointment pursuant to this ordinance, members in the odd numbered places shall be appointed to serve terms expiring October 1, 1995 and members appointed to the even numbered places shall serve terms expiring October 1, 1996. Thereafter, the terms of office of the members shall be two years beginning on October 1st of the year of appointment. The terms of the odd numbered places shall expire in the odd numbered years, and the terms of the even numbered places shall expire in the even numbered years. Board members may be appointed to succeed themselves. Vacancies shall be filled by the city council for the unexpired term. Newly appointed members shall be installed at the first regular board meeting after their appointment. The building official shall be an ex officio member of and shall act as secretary to the Board, but shall have no vote on any matter before the Board. All members of the Board shall hold office at the pleasure of the city council. SECTION 3. QUALIFICATIONS OF MEMBERS It is the intent of the city council that the Board members shall, by reason of diversity of their individual areas of expertise, constitute a board which is broadly representative of various fields of building construction and building standards. In making f:\files\muni\slake\ordinanc\building brd(08-12-94) 2 71)"-3 (W appointments to the Board, the city council will give consideration to persons who are qualified by experience and training to pass on matters pertaining to building construction, mechanical design, plumbing systems or electrical systems, or who have practical experience in matters relating to building construction or value such as a mortgage banker or licensed real estate agent. Members, except for the building official, may not be employees of the City of Southlake. SECTION 4. ORGANIZATION The Board shall hold an organizational meeting in October of each year and shall elect a chairman and vice-chairman from among its members. The Board shall meet when required to carry out the duties established by this ordinance. The Board shall adopt its own rules and procedures and shall keep a record of its proceedings consistent with the provisions of this ordinance and the requirements of law. The Board shall keep minutes kvmw of its proceedings showing the vote of each member upon each question, or if absent or failing to vote, indicating that fact, and shall keep records of its decisions and other official actions, all which shall be filed in the office of the city secretary and kept as public records. SECTION 5. DUTIES AND POWERS (a) The Board is hereby charged with the duty and invested with the authority to: (1) inspect property and premises at reasonable hours where required in the discharge of its responsibilities under the laws of the State of Texas and the city; (2) hear and decide appeals of orders, decisions or determinations made by the building official relative to the application and interpretation of the technical provisions of the following codes adopted by the City of Southlake: f:\files\muni\slake\ordinanc\buildingbrd(08-12-94) 3 (A) the Uniform Building Code; (B) the Uniform Plumbing Code; (C) the Uniform Mechanical Code; (D) the National Electrical Code; and (E) the Uniform Administrative Code; (3) enforce the provisions of Ordinance No. 615, the Substandard Building Ordinance, and carry out the functions established by that ordinance to abate substandard buildings. (b) The Board shall have no authority relative to interpretation of the administrative provisions of the codes listed in Subsection (a)(2) or the ordinance referenced in Subsection (a)(3) nor may the Board waive requirements of any of the codes listed in Subsection (a)(2) or the ordinance referenced in Subsection (a)(2). SECTION 6. MEETINGS AND QUORUMS A quorum for the conduct of business shall consist of four members of the Board. Each member is entitled to one vote and action of the Board shall require a majority of those members present. The members of the Board shall regularly attend meetings of the Board and shall serve without compensation, except for reimbursement of authorized expenses attendant to the performance of their duties. The members shall comply with all time limits and public notice requirements and all meetings of the Board shall be held in compliance with the Texas Open Meetings Act. SECTION 7. CUMULATIVE CLAUSE This ordinance shall be cumulative of all provisions of ordinances of the City of Southlake, Texas, except where the provisions of this ordinance are in direct conflict with f.\filcs\muni\slake\ordinanc\building.brd (08-12-94) 4 7r�S the provisions of such ordinances, in which event the conflicting provisions of such (W ordinances are hereby repealed. To the extent that the composition of the boards of appeals created by the various uniform codes referenced herein conflicts with this ordinance, the terms of this ordinance shall control. SECTION 8. SEVERABILITY CLAUSE It is hereby declared to be the intention of the city council that the phrases, clauses, sentences, paragraphs and sections of this ordinance are severable, and if any phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph or section of this ordinance shall be declared unconstitutional by the valid judgment or decree of any court of competent jurisdiction, such unconstitutionality shall not affect any of the remaining phrases, clauses, sentences, paragraphs and sections of this ordinance, since the same would have been enacted by the city council without the incorporation in this ordinance of any such unconstitutional phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph or section. SECTION 9. EFFECTIVE DATE This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage, and it is so ordained. PASSED AND APPROVED ON FIRST READING ON THIS DAY OF 1994. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY f.\files\muni\slakc\ordinanc\building.brd(08-12-94) 5 (W PASSED AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING ON THIS DAY OF 1994. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: City Attorney f.\files\muni\.slake\ordinanc\building.brd(08-12-94) 6 7/r -06-94 16=26 FROM: ID= PAGE 1 Z, 6 Lone Star Gas Company 1100 East Border•Arlington,TeKns 76010 September 6, 1994 Mr. Curtis Hawk City Manager City of Southlakc 667 North Carrell Southlakc,Texlls 76092 Re: Lone Star Gas Company's Rate Request; Agreement on Delayed Billing Dear Mr. I lawk: As you are aware,the effective date(June 16, 1994)of Lone Star Gas Company's recent rate: request was suspended by the City Council of the City of Southlake for 90 days,until September 14, 1994. Under the Uas Utility Regulatory Act(GURA), that is the maximum time that rates can be suspended. 1 f final action is not taken by the City before the expiration of the suspension period, the requested rates are considered approved by operation of law. The steering committee reviewing the rate case has requested that Lone Star agree to an additional delay in the of ec:tive date of'thc requested rates. Sec. S.UK(d)of GURA is clear that the requested rates will be deemed approved if final action is not taken by the effective date, and the City and Tone Star cannot agree to change the law. However,Lone Star is willing to and can agree to delay the billing of the requested rates as approved by operation of law lbr up to 35 days beyond the 90 day suspension period. If the City takes final action on Lone Star's rate request within such 35 day period, Lone Star will bill the rates as approved by the City. If the City does not take final action on Lone Star's rate request within Such 35 day period,Lone Star will bill the rates as approved by law for gas consumed on and after the:expiration of the 90 day suspension period. Of course, Lone SL1r rescrvcs the right to appeal any litial action by the City to the Railroad Commission as provided by law_ The additional 35-day period shall be deemed the continuation of a hearing in progress pursuant to Section 5.08(d) of OURA,or alternatively, the City's final action taken after September 13, 1994 shall be deemed to have been done pursuant to its authority under Section 5.07 of GURA, B-94 16=26 FROM: I D= PAGE 2 Mr. Curtis 1lawk September 6, 1994 Page 2 If the foregoing is acceptable to the City.please execute both copies of this letter in the space provided and mturn one:copy to me. Sincerely, U� ke,44�� Vcrnic Henderson AGREED TO AND ACCEPTED THIS DAY 01: $IsP"17sMBER, 1994 r CITY OF SOUTI ILAKE BY Mayor `+fir.• Z,. i' City of Southlake, Texas Certificates of Obligation, Series 1994B Financial Analysis Summary Scenario 3 Certificates of Obligation Issue Goal Funding of Land Acq., Equip., Assessment Program and Water Tower Issuance Assumptions Open Market Competitive Sale Aaa Insured Payback Timeframe Equipment 5 Years Land 20 Years Assessment Program 20 Years Water Tower 20 Years Dates Dated Date 10/15/94 First Interest Payment 2/15/96 First Principal Payment 2/15/96 Sources and Uses of Funds Sources of Funds Par Amount of Bonds $6,585,000 Accrued Interest 36,842 Total Sources $6,621,842 Uses of Funds Land Cost $2,178,000 Equipment 415,000 Assessment Program 1,300,000 Water Tower 2,500,000 Cost of Issuance 60,000 Underwriter's Discount 131,700 Deposit to Debt Service Fund 36,842 Bond Rounding 300 Total Uses $6,621,842 Net Interest Cost (NIC % 6.000°k Total Debt Service 1 $11,194,076 AK . Annual Debt Service $559 704 J �W City of Southlake Combined Fiscal Year 1994-95 Capital Program and Muncipal Facility Certificates of Obligation, Series 1995 Scenario 3 - 5 Year Equipment and 20 Year Land and Improv. Amortiza SOURCES AND USES Dated 1/01/1995 Delivery 2/07/1995 Par Amount of Bonds............................... $6,585,000.00 Accrued Interest from 01/01/1995 to 02/0T/1995... 36,842.25 Total Sources $6,621,842.25 Total Underwriter's Discount (2.000%)............. $131,700.00 Costs of Issuance................................. 60,000.00 Deposit to General Fund........................... 2,500,000.00 Deposit to Debt Service Fund...................... 36,842.25 Deposit to Loan Origination Fund.................. 415,000.00 Deposit to Escrow Fund............................ 2,178,000.00 Deposit to Project Construction Fund.............. 1,300,000.00 Contingency....................................... 300.00 Total Uses $6,621,842.25 First Southwest Company FILE = CO95S3 Public Finance 9/ 6/1994 9:55 AM City of Southlake Combined fiscal Year 1994-95 Capital Program and Muncipal Facility Land Ac Certificates of Obligation, Series 1995 Scenario 3 - 5 Year Equipment and 20 Year Land and Improv. Amortization DEBT SERVICE SCHEDULE DATE PRINCIPAL COUPON INTEREST DEBT SERVICE 9/30/1995 - - - - 9/30/1996 55,000.00 4.25000% 596,494.42 651,494.42 9/30/1997 300,000.00 4.50000% 359,335.00 659,335.00 9/30/1998 315,000.00 .4 70000%.. ,345,182.50 660,182..50 .. .1Si99. . ..:335.#10Q 10. /i.90000% 329,572:b0. 664 572 50 9/30/2000 345,000.00 5.00000% 312,740.00 657,740.00 9/30/2001 225,000.00 5.10000% 298,377.50 523,377.50 9/30/2002 245,000.00 5.20000% 286,270.00 531,270.00 9/30/2003 260,000 00 5 30000% 273,010.00 533,010.00 9/3flf200?► 27(1,000,00 5.4DOM0 .258;830 00 $28 830.00 9/30/2005 285,000.00 5.50000% 243,702.50 528,702.50 9/30/2006 300,000.00 5.60000% 227,465.00 527,465.00 9/30/2007 320,000.00 5.70000% 209,945.00 529,945.00 9/30/2008 335,000 00 5 80000% 191,110.00 526,110.00 g13012009 360,000.06 5,90000X 170,77500: 530:775.00 :. 9/30/2010 380,000.00 6.00000% 148,755.00 528,755.00 9/30/2011 400,000.00 6.05000% 125,255.00 525,255.00 9/30/2012 430,000.00 6.10000% 100,040.00 530,040.00 9/30/2013 455,000.00 6.10000% 73,047.50 528,047.50 9/30/291/► 465; .00 6.10009X 44,37750 529377.50 9/30/2015 485,000.00 6.10000% 14,792.50 499,792.50 TOTAL 6,585,000.00 - 4,609,076.92 11,194,076.92 First Southwest Company FILE = CO95S3 Public Finance 9/ 6/1994 9:55 AM YIELD STATISTICS Accrued Interest from 01/01/1995 to 02/07/1995... 36,842.25 Average Life...................................... 11.989 YEARS Bond Years........................................ 78,944.83 Average Coupon.................................... 5.8383516% Form 8038 Weighted NIC............................ 5.9585086% Form 8038 Weighted Average Maturity............... 11.989 YEARS Net Interest Cost (NIC)........................... 6.0051769% Bond Yield for Arbitrage Purposes................. 5.7817851% True Interest Cost (TIC).......................... 6.0322764% Effective Interest Cost (EIC)..................... 6.1489612% ``rr' City of Southlake,Texas CITY_MANAG R ' MEMORANDUM September 1, 1994 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manger FROM: Paul Ward, Building Official Bob Whitehead, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Ordinance 621, 2nd Reading, Adopting the Uniform Administrative Code, 1994 Edition Provisions of the Uniform Administrative Code (U.A.C.) serve as the administrative, organizational, and enforcement rules and regulations for all of the technical codes. This code shall take precedence over the Building, Electrical, Plumbing, and Mechanical Codes with respect to the Administrative Provisions. Changes in the 1994 U.A.C. are: • permits are not required for repair and replacement of wood shingle roofmg materials when such work does not exceed $1000 • homeowners may receive a permit to work on their own home • new permit fees wood shingle re-roofing permits . . . . . $50.00 swimming pools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $200.00 each spa or hot tubs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $100.00 each Certificate of Occupancy . . . . . . . . . . $ 50.00 Permit fees are a major part of the U.A.C. All building, electrical, mechanical, and plumbing permit fees are listed in this code. There has been an increase in all permit fees in the 1994 U.A.C. See attached sheet for 1991 and 1994 Building Permit Fees. Changes from 1st reading on page 3 and page 4 are: • re-roofmg permits of $50 will be issued for wood shingle roofing material only • permits for home owners or members of the immediate family may receive permits to work on their own property only if residing on the structure that is the subject of permit • the swimming pool drainage inspection fee of $50 will be included in the $150 Swimming Pool Construction Permit Fee for a total fee of $200 Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager Ordinance 621, 2nd Reading September 1, 1994 Page 2. Please place Ordinance 621 on the September 6th Council agenda for 2nd reading. Paul Ward Bob Whitehead Attachments: Fee Schedule Ordinance 621 \wpfiles\memo.621 �s a C. t 0 U A W N :-O H U H U NHN N U H O•_�7 �O vAi �p A w 0 b - O" O .... < A 0 A 0 co '�0 0�C O� CA 0 0 P O j " S S u 0'n c A H O 'C7 0 c A A O ° �� 0r- c _•S2c N 8 8 � to « . ii $ $ o o ° N g a ao w= r?c17 a N T O c a c 0 c 0 /e _ _ o c C 3 �. N 0 3 Na $ O O :H H N p 03 0' A ....7 O'ybfi O OtA c .<n 'i'' � e+i $ c-wip+, dc-, N C• �= u' ,$ O U8 7 O 0.0 0 O n�< toO n o �A �oIEHeOOi O:p v $ 8 $ O $ O O Q•? '"'M,-O•n�e "^ d w ^ p b n'b n H I�.d 8 O p S 0;0• ,,,,,� •y an A O Q• N �• ws c 0w0a00 C $ O s to v a � � � A ^' c N c c p '•N N T T N a "'1 =. W.Q. n. F Q O QQ 0• oo $oNg c D QAo A �. A �' E w o ;o Qo c c ., ago r �.00 v 0 7$� m •in � 0 Qv �,L'l.�f'' :r oso �o o a coeva, �= ..< o = = cAr a09 �i $ '<a c D oci0 °= w _ �► ..,,a' � O ?' &1 O Lam..�. O' LJ'< a d'°"� p H HI H p H H_p H Hp H HH H_H H S G•0 A tf cs �O fi y d --dN 61 pdU 1^ 1.1 ►.O. pN N C A A p h 0 -. 5 r, ^ �'.D gd O0 R to g G O O..N g`"' O N N r. •p N E'O C a, c �,...,, Q v T a O o.0 ao. o$ 5�° $ a�8 - 88 8 O 0 _ a a o8-0 �°cw `a o a =8 $m$ a a. 25w p -, So 0 o z «� E �' _ H .* A 'R , H-n H O p H O� S ,O� O '� , "� L7 fn .t S.J. 00 Ot v 0 tAi. M .8..0 _8.S O 8 S 8 S _n� fAj'• m =•�A '• O.O to A �, . < y 0 W OQ^ O n O O'�'1 O'-"1 O y a. A F N c A .`3Cl. to O N 8.N S^ 8^ 8 8 7 H �pH E. tcii �. A - H O H O H O U O N T N g � S d� co O• 03 A to C O Er •o $_8 •.,pU g - 8 m n OQ A O ta O y. z_ QQo $ p0-•Y •O-•Y "+$ �•C_ U� 0 0 N_ O 0 N_ A C TI • a O 7 O a S 7 S '� ° C T - CO (n N '.'� ' "t O y O S$ S8 S� S� O w E. ru C C < .yV.. GA -ni -ni c c 6 H .N 0 Co 0 O• A C S c �" N _ a �I O. D C. 4A Ny '' •HHN8A N � a'O^. Sm� GOAp = 25Q7� 1JTp_ OA•ANo U t b 0W C. 7E Zoc U � CD H (n A Cc) N -4 N N A O Z0nfT c >88 8 0 >O 0. c ^+0� o Fi CO R 8 1 0 > > Z5 LI: 8 0 ; Fr 0 n`� o m T oQ w c °c c c S a A t0i 0 O o • r t f t w '_.0 tiEic 0 r �.C A W N C H_ U H U N H Vf H C.)c� o A S S 3< a 3, O N d c Ci g 25 $ 8 H O T 3 ° 5�8 O$ 8 S o 0 `^ a 0o c � 9o' w co �_ o N $ r < 3 .. C a c.a. 3 5 g° So H 61 U O O Q U $ aN as SE 0 o: �C v. A C ' Or- ?'i^. O o ca cr : G. C W A N C O• C G. C G•Vf O Q A N o' H D C 7 Z, ' C N " " p w G.p W 5 n`O C.? 7^'N O:C U p U U I I ' : b 5 0.:O 0. Oo 0 U qq O In � O p 0 $ OHS S W o c yp'o U�o " o u�'� H1� 8 o C to j a rr 5�Q 5r is• o A � 5. H s rr ° 8 5 ° C% 4A 8a ppS pp Spa 8 a ? .*.Cr• `0.+ p SN p08�d OOH OOH OH SN LAm m 0''000 j O. O$ O O$U ~ $ ~ O '' 't p 8 . iw w "w. �w. 8 o $ o o 0 5$ S2 $ $ 8 rfS m :� D 5 25 0 8 8 5b = m T m c. .g �g r1'o cso rsw S i� m z_ Mtn H H H H SS 7t! c HHH I a I � O � N .""o O O O O S' CJ"H 'A �'w A n O+ •-�S G LA chi W 8 S S 8 off sw OO o0 Op ov S. � ^ c c c o 5 � ? w � � ?� �T wa 0 r N A m ORDINANCE NO.621 AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE 1994 EDITION OR THE UNIFORM ADMINISTRATIVE CODE FOR THE CITY OF SOUTHLARE, TEXAS; PROVIDING ADMINISTRATIVE, ORGANIZATIONAL, AND ENFORCEMENT RULES FOR THE TECHNICAL CODES REGULATING CONSTRUCTION; PROVIDING FOR AMENDMENTS THERETO; PROVIDING THAT THIS ORDINANCE SHALL BE CUMULATIVE OF ALL ORDINANCES; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY FOR VIOLATIONS; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION IN PAMPHLET FORM; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION IN PAMPHLET FORM; PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION IN THE OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, The City of Southlake, Texas, is a home rule city acting under its charter adopted by the electorate pursuant to Article XI, Section 5 of the Texas Constitution and Chapter 9 of the Local Government Code; and WHEREAS, the city council has determined that it is appropriate to adopt the Uniform Administrative Code to provide administrative, organizational and enforcement rules for the technical codes regulating construction in the city; Now, therefore, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS: SECTION 1. The Uniform Administrative Code, 1994 Edition, published by the International Association of Building officials, is hereby adopted as the Administrative Code of the City of Southlake. This code is attached to this ordinance and identified as, Exhibit "A" and is fully incorporated by reference as though copied into the ordinance in its entirety. SECTION 2 . Amendments a) Section 101.3 Scope is hereby amended by adding the following: This code shall take precedence over the Building, 7j-- Z/ Electrical, Plumbing and Mechanical Codes with respect to the Administrative Provisions. b) section 301.2 .1 is hereby amended by adding the item #12 as follows : 12 . Repair and or replacement of WO` `NO roofing materials when the total value of such work does not exceed $1000 in a 12 month period. c) Section 303 .1 is hereby amended by adding the following: Permits shall be issued only to contractors registered as required by ordinance no. 568 except homeowners or members of that immediate family .:i::iT::i::i:::�"<Y:::i::ii::i?iiiii}:::S:ik:i"•::<::}j ^2;:''.:isr:;:s:?':ti::;•iiiii':+S:::p?'S<"::iSS <RS:::,:yi:?ji;;:;`:v..::•:;.::;::: ::... ..;.;:. : u :<:>:<: :::<:::: : :::: ::::::: ::::: :€:>: ::«:: e: may receive permits to work on property shown on the official tax �W roll to be their homestead. Complete detailed plans and specifications are required for homeowner permits. The homeowner shall not employ another person to assist him in any way for such work. d) Section 304 .3 the second sentence is hereby amended to read as follows : Said plan review fee shall be 65 percent of the building permit fee as shown in table 3A except for group R and U occupancies plan review fees shall be 20 percent . e) Table 3-A is hereby amended by adding notes 6, through 10 as follows : 6 . Re-reefing permits re $22 . 99 plus $1 . 99 per sefdare. r:.:0� :��-:•'3:'is'i:'ii:�:::�;:r:ii��:ri::i:;fi::.'i::r:ii::w...».. 2 -5 7 . Swimming Pools are each. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . �' �. .......................... .......................... 8 . Spas or Hot Tubs are each. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $100 . 00 . 9 . Certificate of Occupancy when there is not an open building permit on the job. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $50 . 00 . 10 . Drainage Inspection Fees, due for all new buildings but excluding accessory buildings, additions, and remodeling projects. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$100 . 00. f) Section 309.1 first sentence is hereby amended to read as follows: Buildings shall not be used or occupied nor shall a change of use or occupant, either owner or tenant, be made until the building official has issued a certificate of occupancy therefor as provided herein. (Exception to remain. ) Section 3 . This ordinance shall be cumulative of all provisions of ordinances of the City of Southlake, Texas, except where the provisions of this ordinance are in direct conflict with the provisions of such ordinances, in which event the conflicting provisions of such ordinances are hereby repealed. SECTION 4. It is hereby declared to be the intention of the City Council that the phrases, clauses . sentences, paragraphs and sections of this ordinance are severable, and if any phrase clause, sentence, paragraph or section of this ordinance shall be declared unconstitutional by the valid judgment or decree of any 3 7T-6 - court of competent jurisdiction, such unconstitutionality shall not affect any of the remaining phrases, clauses, sentences, paragraphs and sections of this ordinance, since they would have been enacted by the City Council without the incorporation in this ordinance of the unconstitutional phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph or section. SECTION S. Any person, firm or corporation who violates, disobeys, omits, neglects or refused to comply with or who resists the enforcement of any of the provisions of this ordinance shall be fined not more than Five Hundred Dollars ($500 . 00) for each offense. Each day that a violation is permitted to exist shall constitute a separate offense. SECTION 6 . All rights and remedies of the City of Southlake are expressly saved as -to any and all violations of the provisions of the Uniform Administrative Code, 1994 Edition, 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 that code, they shall not be affected by this ordinance but may be prosecuted until final disposition by courts . SECTION 7 . The City Secretary of the City of Southlake is hereby authorized to publish this ordinance in book or pamphlet form for general distribution among the public, and the operative provisions of this ordinance as so published shall be admissible in evidence in all courts without further proof than the production thereof . 4 /J - SECTION 8. The City Secretary of the City of Southlake is hereby directed to publish the proposed ordinance or its caption and penalty together with a notice setting out the time and place for a public hearing thereon at least ten (10) days before the second reading of this ordinance, and if this ordinance provides for the imposition of any penalty, fine or forfeiture for any violation of any of its provisions, then the City Secretary shall additionally publish this ordinance in the official City newspaper one time within ten days after passage of this ordinance, as required by Section 3 . 13 of the Charter of the City of Southlake. SECTION 9. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and publication as required by law, and it is so ordained. PASSED AND APPROVED ON FIRST READING ON THIS DAY OF ,1994. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY 5 7J--�3 PASSED AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING ON THIS DAY OF ,1994 . MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: City Attorney Date ADOPTED: EFFECTIVE: C:\WPDOCS\ORDINANC.ADM 6 7j--9 City of Southlake,Texas Giro MANAGER MEMORANDUM August 30, 1994 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Paul Ward, Building Official Bob Whitehead, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: 2nd Reading of Ordinance 620 Adopting the National Electrical Code, 1993 Edition The 1993 National Electrical Code (NEC) has changes from the 1990 NEC which include: • Ground fault circuit interrupter (GFCI)protection is required for receptacles installed in restrooms of commercial and industrial buildings. GFCI protection for receptacles in bathrooms have been required only for dwelling unit receptacles in the 1990 NEC. • The importance of providing adequate working space for electrical equipment has been emphasized in the 1993 NEC. The high cost of interior spaces in buildings and other structures make getting and maintaining adequate working space more difficult. This change will provide a better clarification of clear working space in front of electrical equipment. • Many changes in the 1993 NEC are made to provide clarification of electrical installations now required in the current addition. Attempts have been made throughout the code to help the installer have a better understanding of the electrical code requirements. • One local amendment concerning conductor material (page 6 Exhibit "B") requires all wiring for electrical systems to be copper with one exception: conductors 1/0 or larger may be used when specified. This amendment allows service entrance conductors from the electrical meter to the electrical panel to be aluminum if 1/0 or larger. This amendment would also allow conductors outside a building to be aluminum if 1/0 or larger. Aluminum conductors of this size installed properly, will provide a safe electrical system. Please place Ordinance 620 on the September 6th Council Agenda for the 2nd reading. '?00-& Q 0"�� 34ACT Paul Ward Bob Whitehead Attachment memos\ordinance.620 ORDINANCE NO.620 AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE N TIONAL ELECTRICAL CODE, 1993 EDITION; PROVIDING FOR THE ADOPTION OF LOCAL AMENDMENTS THERETO; PROVIDING THAT THIS RDINANCE SHALL BE CUMULATIVE OF ALL ORDINANCES; PROVIDING FOR A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY FOR VIOLATIO S HEREOF; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR PUBLI TION IN THE OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE ATE. WHEREAS, The City of Sou lake, Texas is a home rule city acting under its charter adopted by the electorate pursuant to Article XI, Section 5 of the Texas Constitution and Chapter 9 of the Local Government Code; and WHEREAS, City Council of the City of Southlake deems it necessary to adopt this ordinance governing requirements for the installation and maintenance of electrical systems, and the use of electricity, in order to protect the health, to protect the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of the City of Southlake . NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS: SECTION 1 That the National Electrical Code, 1993 Edition, published by the National Fire Protection Association, Inc . , is hereby adopted as the Electrical Code of the City of Southlake . A true and correct copy of this Code is attached to this ordinance as Exhibit "A SECTION 2 The National Electrical Code, 1993 Edition, is hereby amended as set forth in Exhibit "B" attached to this ordinance. The City of Southlake may from time to time determine that additional local modifications to the National Electrical Code, 1993 Edition, are necessary anra appropriate to meet the unique construction needs of r the City of Southlake. To effectuate these modifications, the City Council shall enact individual ordinances amending this ordinance fully setting forth the change to be made in the Uniform Code. These amendments shall be consolidated as Exhibit "B" to this ordinance. SECTION 3 The material contained in Exhibits "All and "B" to this ordinance shall be maintained as a public record in the office of the City Secretary. These exhibits will be available for public inspection and copying during regular business hours. SECTION 4 This ordinance shall be cumulative of all provisions of ordinances of the City of Southlake, Texas, except where the provisions of this ordinance are in direct conflict with the provisions of such ordinances, in which event the conflicting provisions of such ordinances are hereby repealed. SECTION 5 It is hereby declared to be the intention of the City Council that the phrases, clauses, sentences, paragraphs and sections of this ordinance shall be declared unconstitutional by the valid judgment or decree of any court of competent jurisdiction, such unconstitutionality shall not affect any of the remaining phrases, clauses, sentences, paragraphs and sections of this ordinance, since the same would have been enacted by the City Council without the incorporation in this ordinance of any such unconstitutional 2 �1 phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph or section. SECTION 6 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 7 All rights and remedies of the City of Southlake are expressly saved as to any and all violations of the provisions of any ordinances affecting the electrical systems and electricity 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 buy may be prosecuted until final disposition by the courts . SECTION 8 The City Secretary of the City of Southlake is hereby authorized to publish this ordinance in book or pamphlet form for general distribution among the public, and the operative provisions of this ordinance as so published shall be admissible in evidence in all courts without further proof than the production thereof. SECTION 9 The City Secretary of the City of Southlake is hereby directed 3 �� �7 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 ordnance, and if this ordinance provides for the imposition of any penalty, fine or forfeiture for any violation of any of its provisions, then the City Secretary shall additionally publish this ordinance in the official City newspaper one time within ten days after passage of this ordinance, as required by Section 3 .13 of the Charter of the City of Southlake. SECTION 10 This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and publication as required by law, and it is so ordained. 4 PASSED AND APPROVED ON FIRST READING ON THIS DAY OF ' ,. 1994. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY PASSED AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING ON THIS DAY OF 1994. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: City Attorney Date: ADOPTED• EFFECTIVE �w 5 EXHIBIT "B" s LOCAL AMENDMENTS TO THE 1993 NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CODE' The following sections and paragraphs of the 1994 National Electrical Code are amended as follows: Section 310.2 Conductors (a) No change. (b) Conductor Material. Conductors in this article shall be copper. Except that conductors 1/0 or larger may be aluminum when specified. END OF AMENDMENTS WITH ORDINANCE ADOPTION. c:\ordinanc.ele 6 7-2--,7 City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM kX September 2, 1994 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Paul Ward, Building Official Bob Whitehead, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Ordinance No. 619, 2nd Reading, Adopting the 1994 Edition of the Uniform Building Code The 1994 Uniform Building Code (UBC) has a number of changes from the 1991 UBC. Technical changes made through the code development process include: • dividing Group B occupancies for a more specific identification of building use, • incorporating revised allowable stress values for wood, • adding provisions for smoke control in commercial buildings. Several changes have been incorporated which do not revise the technical content. The 1994 Building Code has been divided into three volumes including reformatting the code provisions and providing metric equivalent. The UBC is one of three model building codes; the other two are National Building Code and Standard Building Code. These model building code organizations through the Council of American Building`Officials have developed a common model building code format. This new format is to be used by each of the three model codes as a step toward national uniformity of the model codes. The major result of the common code format is the change in section numbering system for all of the Uniform Codes. The 1991 Code identified each section in alpha numeric order while the 1994 edition incorporates a decimal system. With the common code format, all three national model building codes will assist the code user and provide uniformity of code application. Local amendments to the 1994 UBC are fire-safety requirements for buildings in the city. Fire sprinkler systems are required in all commercial buildings over 6,000 square feet and in all Group R-1 occupancies (hotels and apartment houses). Insulated fiberboard exterior sheathing is prohibited unless it is fire retardant. Roofing material for single family residences must also be at least class C roofmg, requiring wood shingles to be pressure treated with a fire retardant chemical (See Exhibit "B" page 6). �H - 1 Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager ' 1994 Edition of the Uniform Building Code September 2, 1994 Page 2. Changes after the 1st reading have been made to Appendix Chapter 33 (page 6). This appendix chapter sets forth rules and regulations to control excavation and grading. Amendments provide requirements for: • lot grading inspections • building permits for lot drainage and grading • retaining walls • driveways • drainage swales • fill permits • variance to subdivision plans Please place this ordinance adopting the 1994 Edition of the UBC on the September 6th Council agenda for 2nd reading. Sri bqj Paul Ward Bob Whitehead Attachments wpfiles\memos\ord2.619 UNIFORM BUILDING CODE, VOLUMES 1,2 AND 3 ORDINANCE 0.619 AN O ANCE OP NG 1994 EDITI O THE UNIFORM BUIL NG CO E, VOL 1, 2 3, RE G TIN THE ERECTION, C/O TRU TIO , EME TERATIO , PAIR, MOVING, RE' 0V , D OLITIO , CO RS N, OCC CY EQUIPMENT, USE, HEIGH AR AND EN CE ALL BU LDIN S OR STRUCTURES IN THE C TY O SO E• PROVI NG F TH ADOPTION OF LOCAL AME S THER OVIDIN THI ORDINANCE SHALL BE C TIVE F ORDIN CES; O DING SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROV DING PENALTY OR V LATIO S HEREOF; PROVIDING A SAV GS C S , PROVIDING UBLI TION IN P ET FORM; PRO IDING O PUBLICATION I E OFFICI SPAPER; AND PRO IDI EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City of Southlake is a home rule city acting under its charter adopted by the electorate pursuant to Article XI, Section 5 of the Texas Constitution and Chapter 9 of the Local Government Code; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Southlake deems it necessary to adopt this ordinance providing minimum standards to safeguard the health, property, and welfare of the citizens of Southlake by regulating and controlling the use, occupancy, maintenance, repair, design, construction and quality of materials for buildings and structures within the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS: SECTION 1 That the Uniform Building Code, 1994 Edition, Volumes 1, 2, and 3 published by the International Conference of Building officials, including the generic fire-resistive assemblies listed in the Fire Resistance Design Manual, Thirteenth Edition, dated April 1992 , published by the Gypsum Association as referenced in Tables 7-A, 7-B and 7-C of the specified Uniform Building Code, including Appendix Chapters 3 divisions I, II, and IV, 4 divisions II and III, 9, 11, 15, 18 , 29, 31, and 33 ; and the American National Standard for Accessible and Useable Buildings and Facilities, A117 . 1-1992 (see Uniform Building Code Section 1101 .2) , published by the Council& of American Building Officials as modified or amended in the Uniform Building Code referenced herein, are hereby adopted as the Building Code of the City of Southlake for regulating the erection, construction, enlargement, alteration, repair, moving, removal, demolition, conversion, occupancy, equipment, use, height, area and maintenance of all buildings or structures in the City of Southlake. True and correct copies of these documents are attached as Exhibit "A. " SECTION 2 That the 1994 Edition of the Uniform Building code, as adopted herein, is hereby amended as provided in Exhibit "B" incorporated herein and attached hereto for all purposes of this ordinance. The City of Southlake, Texas may from time to time determine that additional local modifications to the Uniform Building Code, 1994 Edition, are necessary and appropriate to meet the unique needs of the City of Southlake, Texas. To effectuate these local modifications, the City Council shall enact individual ordinances amending this Ordinance, fully setting forth the change to be made in the Uniform Code. These amendments shall be consolidated as Exhibit "B" to this Ordinance. SECTION 3 The material contained in Exhibits "A" and "B" to this Ordinance shall be maintained as a public record in the office of the City Secretary. These Exhibits will be available for public inspection and copying during regular business hours. SECTION 4 This ordinance shall be cumulative of all provisions of ordinances of the City of Southlake, Texas, except where the provisions of this ordinance are in direct conflict with the provisions of such ordinances, in which event the conflicting provisions of such ordinances are hereby repealed. SECTION 5 It is hereby declared to be the intention of the City council that the phrases, clauses, sentences, paragraphs, and sections of this ordinance are severable, and if any phrase, clause sentence, paragraph or section of this ordinance shall be declared unconstitutional by the valid judgment or decree of any court of competent jurisdiction, such unconstitutionality shall not affect any of the remaining phrases, clauses, sentences, paragraphs and sections of this ordinance, since the same would have been enacted by the City Council without the incorporation in this ordinance of 2 any such unconstitutional phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph or section. SECTION 6 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 7 All rights and remedies of the City of Southlake are expressly saved as to any and all violations of the provisions of any ordinances affecting the regulation and control of the use, occupancy, maintenance, repair, design, construction and quality of materials for buildings and structures within the City 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 8 The City Secretary of the City of Southlake is hereby authorized to publish this ordinance in book or pamphlet form for general distribution among the public, and the operative provisions of this ordinance as so published shall be admissible in evidence in all courts without further proof than the production thereof . SECTION 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 days after passage of this ordinance, as required by Section 3 . 13 of the Charter of the City of Southlake. 3 1 \ -S ' SECTION 10 This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and publication as required by law, and it is so ordained. PASSED AND APPROVED ON FIRST READING THIS DAY OF 1994. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY PASSED AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING THIS DAY OF 1994. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: City Attorney Date: ADOPTED• EFFECTIVE• 4 ' EXHIBIT "B" LOCAL AMENDMENTS TO THE 1994 UNIFORM BUILDING CODE The following sections, paragraphs, and sentences of the Uniform Building Code, 1994 Edition, are hereby amended as follows: (1. ) Section 904.2 .2 is hereby amended to add sub item 6 . 6 . Throughout all buildings over 6, 000 square feet on one floor or over 12, 000 square feet on all floors. For purposes of this subjection area separation walls shall not be considered. EXCEPTIONS 1. Airport Control Towers 2 . Open Parking Garages 3 . Group F, Division 2 Occupancies (2 .) Section 904.2 .8 Group R Division 1 Occupancies is hereby amended to read as follows: 904.2 .8 Group R Division 1 Occupancies. An automatic sprinkler system shall be installed throughout all R-1 occupancies. (3 . ) Section 904.2 is hereby amended to add section 904.2 .9 as follows: 904 .2 .9 All Occupancies. An automatic sprinkler system shall be installed throughout all stories of buildings containing three (3) stories or more. EXCEPTIONS 1 . Airport Control Towers 2 . Open Parking Garages 3 . Group F Division 2 Occupancies (4 . ) Section 904 .3 .1 the first sentence is amended to read as follows: All valves controlling the water supply for automatic sprinkler systems and water-flow switches on all sprinkler systems shall be electrically monitored when the number of sprinklers is 20 or more. (5.) Chapter 9 Fire Protection Systems is hereby amended by adding sections 907 and 907 .1 as follows: 907 FIRE ALARM SYSTEMS 907 .1 Where required. Fire alarm systems shall be installed where required by the Fire Code . 5 (6 . ) Appendix Chapter 15 section 1514 is hereby amended by adding the following: Existing non-rated wood shingle or shake roofs may be repaired with like material provided the total value of the repair does not exceed $1, 000 within a 12 month period. Otherwise the roof classification shall comply with table 15 A as amended. (7 .) CHAPTER 15. TABLE 15-A-MINIMUM ROOF CLASSES is hereby amended such that: R-3 and U occupancies require at least class C roofing and all R-1 occupancies require class A roofing. (8.) Section 2315 Fiberboard Sheathing Diaphragms, is hereby amended to add the following paragraph: Notwithstanding anything in this code to the contrary, no insulating fiberboard exterior sheathing shall be used unless it is treated with a fire retardant chemical and certified to be self extinguishing upon ignition. Fiberboard sheathing, when applied, shall be limited to exterior wall construction only. (9.) Appendix Chapter 33 "Excavation and Grading" is hereby amended as follows: SECTION 3304-PURPOSE (unchanged) SECTION-3305-SCOPE (unchanged) SECTION-3306-PERMITS REQUIRED (unchanged) SECTION-3307-HAZARDS (unchanged) SECTION-3308-DEFINITIONS (unchanged) .SECTION-3309-GRADING PERMITS AND REQUIREMENTS 3309 .1 Permits Required. (unchanged) 3309 .2 General 6 1 . Lot grading inspections are conducted by the engineerirg staff prior to placing any concrete and at the time of the inspection of the structure. 2 . The engineering department should be contacted for assistance with any questions, problems, or concerns about the final grade of a lot . 3 . The engineering staff shall be contacted to inspect the lot while grading is still in progress and before any concrete flatwork is set up to be poured. This will help to reduce the chance of any significant problems arising when the final inspection is made. 3309 .3 Building Permits. 1. All comments regarding lot drainage and grading are noted by the engineering department on the plot plans which are submitted to the building inspection department. 2 . The following items are required to be on the plot plans for an engineering review: a. The proper location of the structure and all flatwork as it relates to the property lines . b. The location and identification of all drainage, utility, and/or floodplain easements. C. The location and identification of any underground utilities that could possibly have an effect on the property. d. The proper identification of minimum finished floor elevations if required on the approved plat . e. Location and identification of any proposed retaining walls, drainage swales, yard drains, french drains, or any other items that would be pertinent to the lot grading. f . The directions of drainage flows . g. Topographic information to determine direction of flow and impacts on adjacent property. 3309.4 Retaining Walls. 1. There are three basic circumstances in which retaining walls will be required. These are as follows : k1,- a. If a lot has been cut in order to establish a building pad for the structure, the amount (depth) of cut will need to be retained if proper slopes (4' horizontal : 1' minimum) cannot be established. b. If a lot has been filled in order to establish a building pad for the structure, the amount (depth) of fill will need to be retained if proper slopes (4' horizontal : 1' vertical minimum) cannot be established. C . If needed to facilitate proper lot drainage. 2 . Any proposed wall that is over four (4) feet in height (top of footing to top of wall) is required to be designed by a registered engineer and to have a sealed plan submitted to the building inspection department for approval prior to construction. 3309.5 Driveways. 1 . Any driveways or any other f latwork that is to be located on or near the property line, and has the potential to drain directly onto the adjoining property, must be curbed, inverted or sloped in such a manner as to drain in accordance with the required drainage plan. 2 . The engineering staff shall be contacted to discuss proposed grades of driveways and on the flatwork and inspect the established final grade before any concrete pour is initiated. 3309 .6 Drainage Swales. 1 . Drainage swales are needed in most cases to facilitate proper lot drainage in accordance with the required subdivision drainage plan or as required by the natural grade as shown on the City' s topographic maps. These swales should be constructed in such a manner as to: a. Be maintainable by the homeowner. (No slopes steeper than 4' horizontal : 1' vertical) . b. Be able to carry the anticipated amount of rainwater runoff . C . Minimize erosion problems within the swale itself . This can be accomplished by sodding any swales that could possibly carry a large volume of water. 8 2 . The location of these swales is up to the builder/superintendent in charge of the project . Generally, swales are placed at or near the property lines so as to meet the given drainage requirements . 3 . If possible, swales through the center of side or rear yards should be avoided in anticipation of future improvements such as pools and/or spas which could potentially block a drainage swale located in these areas. 4 . The minimum grade allowed for grass swales is one (1) percent . Lesser slopes may be considered for concrete or stone lined swales. 3309 .7 Side Slopes. The maximum percentage of a slope that is allowed is 4 : 1 . This means that for every four (4) feet of horizontal distance a maximum one (1) foot rise/fall vertically is allowed. Any slope that is steeper than 4 :1 should be retained. It is also recommended that any slope approaching a 4 :1 slope should be sodded to reduce the possibility of erosion. 3309.8 Fill Permits. Any lots that require flood plain areas to be filled shall contact the engineering department in order to process a fill permit in conformance to Federal and City requirements. 3309 .9 VARIANCE TO SUBDIVISION PLANS. In general, all grading shall conform to the grading and drainage as shown on the approved subdivision plans . In those instances where .the applicant proposes to change the grading as shown on the approved subdivision plans, the applicant shall be required to provide a detailed drainage study showing the impacts of the proposed changes on adjacent properties . SECTION 3310-GRADING FREES-DELETE SECTION 3311-BONDS-DELETE SECTOPM 3312-CUTS-DELETE SECTION 3313-FILLS-DELETE SECTION 3314-SETBACKS-DELETE SECTION 3315-DRAINAGE AND TERRACING-DELETE SECTION 3316-EROSION CONTROL-DELETE SECTION 3317-GRADING INSPECTION-DELETE SECTION 3318-COMPLETION OF WORK-DELETE END OF AMENDMENTS WITH ORDINANCE ADOPTION. WPDOCS\ORDINANC.COD 9 City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM CITY MANAGER August 29, 1994 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Paul Ward, Building Official Bob Whitehead, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Ordinance No. 618, 2nd Reading, Adopting the Uniform Mechanical Code, 1994 Edition The most significant changes in the 1994 Uniform Mechanical Code (UMC) are: • the chapter organization has changed to comply with the common code format adopted by the Council of American Building Officials • requirements for fire and smoke dampers in air duct systems installed in commercial buildings • additional requirements for condensate waste from cooling coils in attic locations • clarification of 1991 UMC requirements for heating and cooling equipment installations Please place Ordinance No. 618 on the September 6th Council agenda for 2nd reading. Paul Ward Bob Whitehead Attachment wpfiles\memos\ord.618 ORDINANCE NO.618 AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE UNIFORM MECHANICAL CODE, 1994 EDITION; PROVIDING FOR THE ADOPTION OF LOCAL AMENDMENTS THERETO; PROVIDING THAT THIS ORDINANCE SHALL BE CUMULATIVE OF ALL ORDINANCES; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION IN PAMPHLET FORM; PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION IN THE OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, The City of Southlake, Texas is a home rule city acting under its charter adopted by the electorate pursuant to Article XI, Section 5 of the Texas Constitution and Chapter 9 of the Local Government Code; and WHEREAS, City Council of the City of Southlake deems it necessary to adopt this ordinance governing requirements for the installation and maintenance of heating, ventilating, cooling, and refrigeration systems in order to protect the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of the City of Southlake. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS: SECTION 1 That the Uniform Mechanical Code, 1994 Edition, published by the International Conference of Building Officials, is hereby adopted as the Mechanical Code of the City of Southlake. A true and correct copy of this Code is attached to this ordinance as Exhibit "A. " SECTION 2 The City of Southlake may from time to time determine that local modifications to the Uniform Mechanical Code, 1994 Edition, are necessary and appropriate to meet the unique construction needs of the City of Southlake. To effectuate these modifications, the 7,5�'a City council shall enact individual ordinances amending this ordinance fully setting forth the change to be made in the Uniform Code. The amendments shall be consolidated as Exhibit "B" to this ordinance. SECTION 3 The material contained in Exhibit "A" to this ordinance shall be maintained as a public record in the office of the City Secretary. These exhibits will be available for public inspection and copying during regular business hours. SECTION 4 This ordinance shall be cumulative of all provisions of ordinances of the City of Southlake, Texas, except where the provisions of this ordinance are in direct conflict with the provisions of such ordinances, in which event the conflicting provisions of such ordinances are hereby repealed. SECTION 5 It is hereby declared to be the intention of the City Council that the phrases, clauses, sentences, paragraphs and sections of this ordinance. are severable, and if any phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph or section of this ordinance shall be declared unconstitutional by the valid judgment or decree of any court of competent jurisdiction, such unconstitutionality shall not affect any of the remaining phrases. clauses. sentences, paragraphs and sections of this ordinance, since the same would have been enacted 2 by the City council without the incorporation in this ordinance of any such unconstitutional phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph or section. SECTION 6 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 7 All rights and remedies of the City of Southlake are expressly saved as to any and all violations of the provisions of any ordinances affecting the installation and maintenance of heating. ventilating, cooling, and refrigeration systems 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 buy may be prosecuted until final disposition by the courts. SECTION 8 The City Secretary of the City of Southlake is hereby authorized to publish this ordinance in book or pamphlet form for general distribution among the public, and the operative provisions of this ordinance as so published shall be admissible in evidence in all courts without further proof than the production thereof. 3 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 ordnance, and if this ordinance provides for the imposition of any penalty, fine or forfeiture for any violation of any of its provisions, then the City Secretary shall additionally publish this ordinance in the official City newspaper one time within ten days after passage of this ordinance, as required by Section 3 .13 of the Charter of the City of Southlake. SECTION 10 This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and publication as required by law, and it is so ordained. PASSED AND APPROVED ON FIRST READING ON THIS DAY OF 1994. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY 4 PASSED AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING ON THIS DAY OF 1994 . MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: City Attorney Date• ADOPTED: EFFECTIVE• C:\WPDOCS\ORDIANC.mec 5 City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM CITY MANAGER August 29, 1994 -TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Paul Ward, Building Official Bob Whitehead, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Ordinance No. 617, 2nd Reading, Adopting the Uniform Plumbing Code, 1994 Edition The following are the most significant changes to the Uniform Plumbing Code: • The chapter organization has changed in order to comply with the common code format adopted by the Council of American Building Officials. • Minor adjustments have been made to accommodate new plumbing fixtures and materials on the market. • Polybutylene (PB) water piping has been removed from the code and will no longer be permitted for water service lines from the water meter to the house. PB has had an unsatisfactory service record in many areas. • New Appendix Chapter F has been added for medical gas plumbing. These systems have been regulated through the Fire Codes. Medical gas systems are typically found in dental offices. • New Appendix Chapters G and J have been added to cover requirements for graywater systems and reclaimed water systems to provide standards for re-use of water and therefore encourage water conservation. Note: The Appendix chapters are not mandated by the code, but provide standards that may be used should these systems be installed. Please place Ordinance 617 on the September 6th Council agenda for 2nd reading. • Q_, - Paul Ward Bob Whitehead Attachment wpfiles\memo\ord2.617 ORDINANCE NO.617 AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE UNIFORM PLUMBING CODE, 1994 EDITION; PROVIDING FOR THE ADOPTION OF LOCAL AMENDMENTS THERETO; PROVIDING THAT THIS ORDINANCE SHALL BE CUMULATIVE OF ALL ORDINANCES; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION IN PAMPHLET FORM; PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION IN THE OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, The City of Southlake, Texas is a home rule city acting under its charter adopted by the electorate pursuant to Article XI, Section 5 of the Texas Constitution and Chapter 9 of the Local Government Code; and WHEREAS, City Council of the City of Southlake deems it necessary to adopt this ordinance governing requirements for the installation and maintenance of any plumbing and gas piping systems including requirements for materials, in order to protect the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of the City of Southlake. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS: SECTION 1 That the Uniform Plumbing Code, 1994 Edition, published by the International Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials, is hereby adopted as the Plumbing Code of the City of Southlake. A true and correct copy of this Code is attached to this ordinance as Exhibit "A. " SECTION 2 The City of Southlake may from time to time determine that local modifications to the Uniform Plumbing Code, 1994 Edition, are necessary and appropriate to meet the unique construction needs of �� of the City of Southlake. To effectuate these modifications, the City LW council shall enact individual ordinances amending this ordinance fully setting forth the change to be made in the Uniform Code. The amendments shall be consolidated as Exhibit "B" to this ordinance. SECTION 3 The material contained in Exhibit "A" to this ordinance shall be maintained as a public record in the office of the City Secretary. These exhibits will be available for public inspection and copying during regular business hours. SECTION 4 This ordinance shall be cumulative of all provisions of ordinances of the City of Southlake, Texas, except where the provisions of this ordinance are in direct conflict with the provisions of such ordinances, in which event the conflicting provisions of such ordinances are hereby repealed. SECTION 5 It is hereby declared to be the intention of the City Council that the phrases, clauses, sentences, paragraphs and sections of this ordinance are severable, and if any phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph or section of this ordinance shall be declared unconstitutional by the valid judgment or decree of any court of competent jurisdiction, such unconstitutionality shall not affect any of the remaining phrases . clauses. sentences, paragraphs and sections of this ordinance, since the same would have been enacted L2 by the City council without the incorporation in this ordinance of any such unconstitutional phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph or section. SECTION 6 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 7 All rights and remedies of the City of Southlake are expressly saved as to any and all violations of the provisions of any ordinances affecting the installation and maintenance of plumbing and gas systems 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 buy may be prosecuted until final disposition by the courts. SECTION 8 The City Secretary of the City of Southlake is hereby authorized to publish this ordinance in book or pamphlet form for general distribution among the public, and the operative provisions of this ordinance as so published shall be admissible in evidence in all courts without further proof than the production thereof. L3 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 ordnance, and if this ordinance provides for the imposition of any penalty, fine or forfeiture for any violation of any of its provisions, then the City Secretary shall additionally publish this ordinance in the official City newspaper one time within ten days after passage of this ordinance, as required by Section 3 . 13 of the Charter of the City of Southlake. SECTION 10 This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and publication as required by law, and it is so ordained. PASSED AND APPROVED ON FIRST READING ON THIS DAY OF 1994. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY 4 PASSED AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING ON THIS DAY OF 1994 . MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: City Attorney Date: ADOPTED: EFFECTIVE: C:\WPDOCS\ORDIANC.plb 5 City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM CITY MANAGER August 29, 1994 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Paul Ward, Building Official Robert Whitehead, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Ordinance No. 616, 2nd Reading, Amending Ordinance No. 568, Contractor Licensing Ordinance, and Amending Certain Licensing Requirements Ordinance 616 amends Ordinance 568 and clarifies the license requirements for Master Electricians by listing accepted examining boards and testing agencies. Before a permit is issued each electrical contractor must show proof of current Master Electrical License from a city recognizing the testing agency or examining board listed. Cities with other examinations must submit information to show equivalency to the exam given by the recognized agency. Recognized testing agencies are: Tarrant County Electrical Examining Board Dallas County Electrical Examining Board Block and Associates, Gainesville, Florida Southern Building Code Congress International A list of participating cities in the North Central Texas Electrical Examination Program is attached. Please place Ordinance 616 on the September 6th Council agenda for the 2nd reading. "--Pc LjW'Q— 6A' Paul Ward Bob Whitehead Attachments: Examination list Ordinance 616 \wpfiles\memo\ord2.616 e PARTICIPATING CITIES AS OF 7/6/94 NORTH CENTRAL TEXAS ELECTRICAL EXAMINATION PROGRAM Allen Arlington Bartonville Carrollton Crowley Dallas DeSoto Farmer's Branch Ferris _ Forney Fort Worth Frisco Garland Grapevine Irving Lake Dallas Lancaster Lewisville Mesquite Piano Richardson Sanger Southlake Stephenville ♦r �Fa ORDINANCE NO.616 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 568, THE CONTRACTOR'S LICENSING ORDINANCE; AMENDING CERTAIN LICENSE REQUIREMENTS; PROVIDING THAT THIS ORDINANCE SHALL BE CUMULATIVE OF ALL ORDINANCES; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING A PENALTY FOR VIOLATIONS; PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION IN PAMPHLET FORM; PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION IN THE OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, The City of Southlake, Texas, is a home rule city acting under its charter adopted by the electorate pursuant to Article XI, section 5 of the Texas Constitution and Chapter 9 of the Local Government Code; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that in order to protect its citizens and to assure that construction work in the City is performed to standards mandated by the City codes, it is necessary to require registration of all construction contractors; WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that certain qualifications are necessary for electrical contractors. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS: W Section 1. That ordinance No 568 Section 4 (6) is hereby amended to read as follows. E (6 . ) Before the building official may approve registration for an electrical contractor, the contractor shall show proof of a current Master Electrical License from a city recognizing The Tarrant County Electrical Examining Board, the Dallas County Electrical Examining Board, or any other city in the state of Texas provided that city' s examination is not less restrictive than the T.C.E.E.B. The examinations administered by S.B.C.C. I . and by Block and Associates are hereby recognized as being acceptable. Cities with other examinations must submit information satisfactory to the Building Official to show equivalency. SECTION 2 . Cumulative Clause. This ordinance shall be cumulative of all provisions of ordinances of the City of Southlake, Texas, except where the provisions of this ordinance are in direct conflict with the provisions of such ordinances, in which event the conflicting provisions of such ordinances are hereby repealed. SECTION 3 . Severability Clause. It is hereby declared to be the intention of the City Council that the phrases, Clauses, sentences, paragraphs and sections of this ordinance are severable, and if any phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph or section of this ordinance shall be declared unconstitutional by the valid judgment or decree of any court of competent : jurisdiction, such unconstitutionality shall not affect any of the remaining phrases, clauses, sentences, paragraphs and sections- of this ordinance, since the same would have been enacted by the City Council without the incorporation in this ordinance of any such unconstitutional phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph or section. SECTION 4. Penalty Clause. 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 S. Pamphlet Form Publication Clause. The City Secretary of the City of Southlake is hereby authorized to publish this ordinance in book or pamphlet form for general distribution among the public, and the operative provisions of this ordinance as so published shall be admissible in evidence in all courts without further proof than the production thereof. • SECTION 6. Newspaper Publication Clause. The City Secretary of the City of Southlake is hereby directed to publish .the proposed ordinance or its caption and penalty together with a notice setting out the time and place for a public hearing thereon at least ten (10) days before the second reading of this ordinance, and if this ordinance provides for the imposition of any penalty, fine or forfeiture for any violation of any of its provisions, then the City Secretary shall additionally publish this ordinance in the official City newspaper one time within ten days after passage of this ordinance, as required by Section 3 .13 of the Charter of the City of Southlake. SECTION 7. Effective Date Clause. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and publication as required by law, and it is so ordained. PASSED AND APPROVED ON FIRST READING ON THIS DAY OF , 1994. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY 2 7z--7-- PASSED AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING ON THIS DAY OF 1994. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: City Attorney Date• ADOPTED: EFFECTIVE• c:\wpdoca\ordinanc.lic 3 City of Southlake,Texas CITY MA"NAG MEMORANDUM August 29, 1994 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Paul Ward, Building Official Bob Whitehead, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Ordinance No. 615, 2nd Reading, Regulating the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings Ordinance 615 regulates the repair, demolition, removal, securing, and vacation of Dangerous and Substandard Buildings. The ordinance also establishes the procedure of the Board of Appeals in compliance with state law. The Dangerous and Substandard Buildings Ordinance is designed to comply with the requirements of Chapter 214 of the Local Government Codes by establishing procedures for notices and hearings. The Board of Appeals will conduct public hearings concerning any repair work done by the city. An order from the Board of Appeals must be limited to residential buildings. Col If a property owner fails to repair, remove or demolish a building as ordered, Section XV provides a penalty in certain circumstances. This ordinance requires that the owner be given a reasonable time to complete the ordered work and then, if the owner does not complete the work within a reasonable time, the lien holders must be given an additional period of time to complete the work prior to any action by the city. Section XI provides for recovery of cost of securing, repair, removal or demolition of a dangerous building when work has been complete. Expenses incurred by the City will be the personal obligation of the property owner in addition to a lien on the property. Please place Ordinance No. 615 for the 2nd reading at the September 6th Council agenda. Q- Paul Ward Bob Whitehead Attachment \wpfi1es\memos\ordin.615 ORDINANCE NO. 615 AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO DANGEROUS AND SUBSTANDARD BUILDINGS;P VIDING FOR THE REPAIR, DEMOLITION, REMOVAL, SECURING AND VACATION OF DANGEROUS AND SUBSTANDARD BUILDIN PROVIDING THAT THIS ORDINANCE SHALL BE CUMULATIVE F ALL ORDINANCES; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PR ING FOR A PENALTY FOR VIOLATIONS HEREOF; PROVIDIN A SAVINGS CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION IN THE CIAL NEWSPAPER;AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City of Southlake is a ome rule city acting under its Charter adopted by the electorate pursuant to Article I, Section 5 of the Texas Constitution and Chapter 9 of the Local Government Code; d WHEREAS, the City Council of th City of Southlake deems it necessary to adopt this ordinance providing minimum stand rds to safeguard the health, property and welfare of the citizens of Southlake by regulat' and controlling the use, occupancy, maintenance, repair,vacation, removal, demolition, d abatement of substandard or dangerous buildings within the City of Southlake; and WHEREAS, Chapter 214 o the Local Government Code authorizes a municipality to regulate substandard buildings and establishes procedures thereof; and WHEREAS, it is the int ntion of the City Council of the City of Southlake to establish minimum standards for the continued use and occupancy of all buildings regardless of the date of thei destruction and to provide for the giving of proper notice to the owner of a building and to provide for a public hearing to determine whether a building complies with the standards set out in this ordinance. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS: f:\filcs\muni\slakc\ordinanc\dangcr03(08-11-94) SECTION I. PURPOSE AND SCOPE (1) Purpose. It is the purpose of this Ordinance to provide a just, equitable and practical method, to be cumulative with and in addition to any other remedy provided by the Building Code, Chapter 214 of the Local Government Code, or otherwise available at law, whereby buildings, as defined herein, which from any cause endanger the life, limb, health, morals, property, safety or welfare of the general public or their occupants and may be required to be repaired, vacated, demolished, removed or secured. (2) Scope. The provisions of this Ordinance shall apply to all buildings which are hereinafter defined as dangerous or substandard buildings whether now in existence or whether they may hereafter become dangerous. SECTION H. DEFINITIONS (1) Building means and includes any building, fence, awning, canopy, sign, shed, garage, house, tent or other structure whatsoever and the enumeration of specific types of structures shall not be deemed to exclude other types of structures to which the sense and meaning of the provisions hereof in context reasonably have application. (2) Building Code is the Uniform Building Code promulgated by the International Conference of building officials, as adopted by the City of Southlake. 3 Building Board of Appeals (sometimes referred to as "the Board") is the Board created by Ordinance No. 622. SECTION III. ENFORCEMENT (1) General. (a) Administration. The building official is hereby authorized to enforce the provisions of this Ordinance. The building official shall have the power to render interpretations of this Ordinance and to adopt and enforce rules and supplemental regulations in order to clarify the application of its provisions. Such interpretations, rules and regulations shall be in conformity with the intent and purpose of this Ordinance. (b) Inspections. The building official and the fire marshal or their designees are hereby authorized to make such inspections and take such actions as may be required to enforce the provisions of this Ordinance. (c) Right of Entry. When it is necessary to make an inspection to enforce the provisions of this Ordinance, or when the building official or his f.\files\muni\slake\ordinanc\danger03(08-11-94) 2 7o-3 designee has a reasonable cause to believe that there exists in a building or upon a premises a condition which is contrary to or in violation of this Ordinance which makes the building or premises unsafe, dangerous, or hazardous, the building official or his designee may enter the building or premises at reasonable times to inspect or perform the duties imposed by this Ordinance, provided that if such building or premises be occupied that credentials be presented to the occupant and entry requested. If such building or premises be unoccupied, the building official or his designee shall first make a reasonable effort to locate the owner or other person having charge or control of the building or premises and request entry. If entry is refused, the building official shall have recourse to the remedies provided by law to secure entry. (2) Abatement of Dangerous or Substandard Buildings. All buildings or portions thereof which are determined after inspection by the building official to be dangerous or substandard as defined by this Ordinance are hereby declared to be public nuisances and shall be abated by repair, vacation, demolition, removal or securing in accordance with the procedures specified in this Ordinance. (3) Unlawful to Violate Ordinance. It shall be unlawful for any person, firm or corporation to erect, construct, or use, occupy or maintain any building or cause or permit the same to be done in violation of this Ordinance. (4) Inspection Authorized. All buildings within the scope of this Ordinance and all construction or work for which a permit is required shall be subject to inspection by the building official. SECTION IV. SUBSTANDARD BUILDINGS DECLARED For the purposes of this Ordinance, any building, regardless of the date of its construction, which has any or all of the conditions or defects hereinafter described shall be deemed to be a substandard building: (1) Any building that is dilapidated, substandard, or unfit for human habitation and a hazard to the public health, safety and welfare. (2) Any building that, regardless of its structural condition, is unoccupied by its owners, lessees or other invitees and is unsecured from unauthorized entry to the extent that it could be entered or used by vagrants or other uninvited persons as a place of harborage or could be entered or used by children. (3) Any building that is boarded up, fenced or otherwise secured in any manner if: (a) The building constitutes a danger to the public even though secured from entry; or f:\files\muni\slakc\ordinanc\danger03(08-11-94) 3 'h) a (b) The means used to secure the building are inadequate to �r prevent unauthorized entry or use of the building in the manner described by Section IV(2) above. (4) Whenever any door, aisle, passageway, stairway or other means of exit is not of sufficient width or size or is not so arranged as to provide safe and adequate means of exit in case of fire or panic. (5) Whenever the walking surface of any aisle, passageway, stairway or other means of exit is so warped, worn, loose, torn or otherwise unsafe as to not provide safe and adequate means of exit in case of fire or panic. (6) Whenever the stress in any materials, or members or portion thereof, due to all dead and live loads, is more than one and one half times the working stress or stresses allowed in the Building Code for new buildings of similar structure, purpose or location. (7) Whenever any portion thereof has been damaged by fire, earthquake, wind flood or by any other cause, to such an extent that the structural strength or stability thereof is materially less than it was before such catastrophe and is less than the minimum requirements of the Building Code for new buildings of similar structure, purpose or location. (8) Whenever any portion or member or appurtenance thereof is likely to fail, or to become detached or dislodged, or to collapse and thereby injure persons or damage property. (9) Whenever any portion of a building, or any member, appurtenance or ornamentation on the exterior thereof is not of sufficient strength or stability, or is not so anchored, attached or fastened in place so as to be capable of resisting a wind pressure of one half of that specified in the Building Code for new buildings of similar structure, purpose or location without exceeding the working stresses permitted in the Building Code for such buildings. (10) Whenever any portion thereof has wracked, warped, buckled or settled to such an extent that walls or other structural portions have materially less resistance to winds or earthquakes than is required in the case of similar new construction. (11) Whenever the building, or any portion thereof, because of (a) dilapidation, deterioration or decay; (b) faulty construction; (c) the removal, movement or instability of any portion of the ground necessary for the purpose of supporting such building; (d) the deterioration, decay or inadequacy of its foundation; or (e) any other cause, is likely to partially or completely collapse. (12) Whenever, for any reason, the building, or any portion thereof, is manifestly unsafe for the purpose for which it is being used. f.\files\muni\slakc\ordinanc\dangcrO3(0&11-94) 4 (13) Whenever the exterior walls or other vertical structural members list, lean or buckle to such an extent that a plumb line passing through the center of gravity does not fall inside the middle one third of the base. (14) Whenever the building, exclusive of the foundation, shows 33 percent or more damage or deterioration of its supporting member or members, or 50 or more percent damage or deterioration of its non-supporting members, enclosing or outside walls or coverings. (15) Whenever the building has been so damaged by fire, wind, earthquake, flood or other causes, or has become so dilapidated or deteriorated as to become (a) an attractive nuisance to children; or, (b) a harbor for vagrants, criminals or immoral persons. (16) Whenever any building has been constructed, exists or is maintained in violation of any specific requirement or prohibition applicable to such building provided by the building regulations of this jurisdiction, as specified in the Building Code, or of any law or ordinance of this state or jurisdiction relating to the condition, location or structure of buildings. (17) Whenever any building which, whether or not erected in accordance with all applicable laws and ordinances, has in any non-supporting part, member or portion less than 50 percent, or in any supporting part, member or portion less than 66 percent of the (a) strength, (b) fire-resisting qualities or characteristics, or (c) weather-resisting qualities or characteristics required by law in the case of a newly constructed building of like area, height and occupancy in the same location. 18 Whenever a building, used or intended to be used for dwelling purposes, ( ) g because of inadequate maintenance, dilapidation, decay, damage, faulty construction or arrangement, inadequate light, air or sanitation facilities, or otherwise, is determined by the building official to be unsanitary, unfit for human habitation or in such a condition that is likely to cause sickness or disease for reasons including, but not limited to, the following: (a) Lack of, or improper water closet, lavatory, bathtub or shower in a dwelling unit or lodging house. (b) Lack of, or improper water closets, lavatories and bathtubs or showers per number of guests in a hotel. (c) Lack of, or improper kitchen sink in a dwelling unit. (d) Lack of hot and cold running water to plumbing fixtures in a hotel. (e) Lack of hot and cold running water to plumbing fixtures in a dwelling unit or lodging house. (f) Lack of adequate heating facilities. f.\files\muni\slake\ordinanc\danger03(08-11-94) 5 7 �� (g) Lack of, or improper operation of, required ventilating equipment. (h) Lack of minimum amounts of natural light and ventilation required by this code. (i) Room and space dimensions less than required by this code the building code. 0) Lack of required electrical lighting. (k) Dampness of habitable rooms. (1) Infestation of insects, vermin or rodents. (m) General dilapidation or improper maintenance. (n) Lack of connection to required sewage disposal system. (o) Lack of adequate garbage and rubbish storage and removal facilities. (19) Whenever any building, because of obsolescence, dilapidated condition, deterioration, damage, inadequate exits, lack of sufficient fire-resistive construction, faulty electric wiring, gas connections or heating apparatus, or other cause, is determined by the fire marshal to be a fire hazard. (20) Whenever any building is in such a condition as to make a public nuisance known to the common law or in equity jurisprudence. (21) Whenever any portion of a building remains on a site after the demolition or destruction of the building. (22) Whenever any building is abandoned so as to constitute such building or portion thereof an attractive nuisance or hazard to the public. (23) Any building constructed and is still existing in violation of any provision of the Building Code or Uniform Fire Code of the City of Southlake. f.\files\muni\slake\ordinanc\danger03(08-11-94) 6 X)- 7 SECTION V. DETERMINATION BY BUILDING OFFICIAL When the building official has inspected or caused to be inspected any building and has found and determined that the building is substandard, the building official may take any or all of the following actions, as he or she deems appropriate: (1) Issue notice to the record owner that the building is substandard and must be repaired or demolished; or (2) Issue citation(s) for violation(s) of this Ordinance; or (3) Secure the building if permitted by Subsection XII(1) below; or (4) Recommend to the Board that abatement proceedings be commenced pursuant to Section VI below. SECTION VI. PUBLIC HEARING FOR ABATEMENT OF SUBSTANDARD BUILDINGS (1) Commencement of Proceedings. When the building official has found and determined that a building is a substandard building, the building official shall commence proceedings to cause the repair, vacation, relocation of occupants, removal, demolition or securing of the building. (2) Public Hearing to be Held Except when the City Council finds that a building is likely to immediately endanger persons or property, a public hearing before the Board shall be held to determine whether a building complies with the standards set out in Section IV above. If the City Council determines that the building constitutes an immediate danger, the procedures set forth in Section XII shall be followed. (3) Notice. Not less than ten (10) days prior to the date on which the hearing is set, the building official shall issue a notice of the public hearing directed to the record owner of the building as appears in the records of the office of County Clerk, and to all mortgagees and lienholders that can be determined from a reasonable search of instruments on file in the office of the County Clerk. The notice shall contain: (a) The name and address of the record owner; (b) The street address or legal description sufficient for identification of the premises upon which the building is located; (c) A statement that the building official has found the building to be substandard or dangerous, with a brief and concise description of the conditions found to render the building dangerous or substandard under the provisions of Section IV above. f.\files\muni\slake\ordinanc\dangerO3(W11-94) 7 7d-8 (d) A statement that the owner, lienholder, or mortgagee will be required to submit at the hearing proof of the scope of any work that may be required to comply with the Ordinance, and the time it will take to reasonably perform the work. (e) Notice of the time and place of the public hearing. (f) A statement that if the building is found to be in violation of this Ordinance, the Board may order that the building be vacated, secured, repaired, removed or demolished within a reasonable time. (4) Additional Notice of Public Hearing. Prior to the public hearing, the City may file a copy of the notice mailed pursuant to Section IV(3) above in the official public records of real property in the county in which the property is located. If such notice is not filed of record, each identified mortgagee and lienholder must be notified of any abatement order issued by the Board at the public hearing, prior to any remedial action by the City. (5) Burden of Proof. At the public hearing, the owner, lienholder or mortgagee has the burden of proof to demonstrate the scope of any work that may be required to comply with the Ordinance, and the time it will take to reasonably perform the work. (6) Conduct of Public Hearing. At the public hearing, the owner of the building, and all other interested persons may make their appearance and be heard. Any evidence may be received and considered by the Board. The chairman of the Board, or in his absence, any officer designated by rules adopted by the Board to preside at meetings, shall preside and shall determine all questions of order. The hearing may be adjourned from day to day or continued upon a majority vote of the Board. SECTION VH. ORDER OF BUILDING BOARD OF APPEALS (1) Findings of the Board. If the Board, by a majority vote, finds upon evidence presented at the public hearing that the building is in violation of standards set out in Section IV, the Board may order that the building be repaired, vacated, removed or demolished, secured, or the occupants relocated, by the owner, mortgagee or lienholder within a reasonable time as provided herein. (2) Time Allowed to Complete Work. (a) The order must require the owner, lienholder or mortgagee of the building to within 30 days: (i) Secure the building from unauthorized entry; and/or f.\files\muni\slake\ordinanc\danger03(08-11-94) 8 (ii) Repair, remove or demolish the building unless the owner or lienholder establishes at the hearing that the work cannot reasonably be performed within 30 days. (b) If the Board allows the owner, lienholder or mortgagee more than thirty (30) days to repair, remove or demolish the building, the Board shall establish specific time schedules for the commencement and performance of the work and shall require the owner, lienholder or mortgagee to secure the property in a reasonable manner from unauthorized entry while the work is being performed, as determined by the Board. (c) The Board may not allow the owner, lienholder or mortgagee more than ninety (90) days to repair, remove or demolish the building or fully perform all work required to comply with the order unless the owner lienholder or mortgagee: (i) Submits a detailed plan and time schedule for the work at the hearing; and (ii) Establishes at the hearing that the work cannot be reasonably completed within ninety(90) days because of the scope and complexity of the work. (d) If the Board allows the owner, lienholder or mortgagee more than ninety (90) days to complete any part of the work required to repair, remove or demolish the building, the Board shall require the owner, lienholder or mortgagee to regularly submit progress reports to the building official to demonstrate that the owner, lienholder or mortgagee has complied with the time schedules established for commencement and performance of the work. The order may require that the owner, lienholder or mortgagee appear before the Board or the building official to demonstrate compliance with the time schedules. (3) Contents of order. The order of the Board must contain at minimum: (a) An identification which is not required to be a legal description, of the building and the property on which it is located; and (b) A description of the violation of minimum standards present in the building; and (c) A description of the ordered actions, including a statement that the owner may repair, if feasible, or demolish or remove at his option; and f:\files\muni\slake\ordinanc\danger03(08-11-94) 9 (d) A statement that the City will vacate, secure, remove or demolish the building or relocate the occupants of the building if the ordered action is not taken within the time allowed, and charge the cost to the property; and (e) If the Board has determined that the building will endanger persons or property, or if the building is a dwelling with 10 or fewer dwelling units, a statement that the city may repair the building and charge the costs to the property if the ordered action is not taken within the time allowed. SECTION VIII. NOTICE OF ORDER OF BUILDING BOARD OF APPEALS (1) Order Shall be Mailed. After the public hearing, the building official shall promptly mail, by certified mail, return receipt requested, a copy of the order to the record owner of the building, and each identified lienholder and mortgagee of the building. (2) Order Shall be Filed with City Secretary. Within ten (10) days after the date that the order is issued by the Board, the building official shall file a copy of the order in the office of the City Secretary. (3) Order Shall be Published. Within ten (10) days after the date the order is issued by the Board, the building official shall publish in a newspaper of general circulation within the City a notice containing: (a) The street address or legal description of the property; and (b) The date the hearing was held; and (c) A brief statement indicating the results of the order; and (d) Instructions stating where a complete copy of the order may be obtained. SECTION IX. ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDER OF BUILDING BOARD OF APPEALS (1) If order not complied with, City may take action. If the building is not vacated, secured, repaired,.removed or demolished within the time specified by the order, the City may vacate, secure, repair, remove or demolish the building or relocate the occupants at its own expense, provided however: (a) The City may not act to remove or demolish a building until after the Board has found: f:\files\muni\slake\ordinanc\danger03(08-11-94) 10 (i) That such defects or conditions exist to the extent that the life, health, property or safety of the public or the occupants of the building are endangered; and (ii) The building is infeasible of repair; or (iii) There is no reasonable probability that the building will be repaired within a reasonable period of time if additional time is given. (b) The city may only repair a building as provided herein to the extent necessary to correct the conditions which render the building dangerous, and may not act to repair a building unless: (i) The Board has made a determination that the building is likely to endanger person or property; and (ii) The building is a residential dwelling with ten (10) or fewer dwelling units. (2) Posting of Notice to Vacate Building. If the order requires vacation or if compliance is not had with the order within the time specified therein, the building official is authorized to require that the building be vacated. Notice to vacate shall be mailed by certified mail, return receipt requested to the occupant of the building and it shall be posted at or upon each entrance to the building and shall be in substantially the following form: "SUBSTANDARD BUILDING DO NOT ENTER UNSAFE TO OCCUPY It is a misdemeanor to occupy this building or to remove or deface this notice. Building Official City of Southlake" (3) Remedial Action by City. Any repair or demolition work, or securing of the building shall be accomplished and the cost thereof paid and recovered in the manner hereinafter provided. Any surplus realized from the sale of such building, or from the demolition thereof, over and above the cost of demolition and cleaning of the lot, shall be paid over to the person or persons lawfully entitled thereto. f•.\files\muni\slake\ordinanc\danger03(08-11-94) 11 7Z-).-/1 (4) Faiiure to Obey Order. Any person to whom an order pursuant to Section VII is directed who fails, neglects or refuses to comply with such order shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and may be prosecuted in municipal court in addition to any other remedies available to the City provided herein. (5) Interference Prohibited. No person shall obstruct, impede or interfere with any officer, employee, contractor or authorized representative of the City or with any person who owns or holds any estate or interest in the building which has been ordered repaired, vacated, demolished, removed or secured under the provisions of this Ordinance; or with any person to whom such building has been lawfully sold pursuant to the provisions of this Ordinance,whenever such officer, employee, contractor or authorized representative of the City, person having an interest or estate in such building, or purchaser is engaged in the work of repairing, vacating and repairing, or demolishing, removing or securing any such building pursuant to the provision of this Ordinance, or in performing any necessary act preliminary to or incidental to such work or authorized or directed pursuant to this Ordinance. (6) Permit Required. Any work of closure, repair, removal or demolition by the property owner or any lienholder or mortgagee or their agents must be performed pursuant to valid unexpired permits issued by the City. All permits issued pursuant to an order of the Board shall expire upon expiration of the time for compliance set forth in the order. SECTION X. PERFORMANCE OF WORK BY THE CITY (1) Procedure. When any work of repair, removal, demolition or securing is to be performed by the City pursuant to the provisions of any order of the City Council or the Board, the work may be accomplished by City personnel or by private contract as may be deemed necessary. Rubble and debris shall be removed from any premises and the lot cleaned if removal or demolition is ordered. The building or building materials may be sold if removal or demolition is ordered, and the proceeds shall be used to offset other costs of the work. (2) Costs. The cost of such work shall be paid from City funds and shall constitute a special assessment and a lien against such property to secure payment thereof; together with ten percent (10%) interest on such amount on the date from the work is performed. (3) Repair to Minimum Standards Only. The City may repair the building at its own expense and assess the expenses on the land on which the building stands or is attached to only to the extent necessary to bring the building into compliance with minimum standards. f:\files\muni\slake\ordinanc\danga03(08-11-94) 12 Z)i� SECTION XI. RECOVERY OF COST OF SECURING, REPAIR, REMOVAL OR DEMOLITION (1) Itemized Account and Notice of Lien. The building official shall keep an itemized account of the expenses incurred by the City in the securing, repair, removal or demolition of any building pursuant to this Ordinance. Upon completion of the work, the Building Official shall prepare and file with the City Secretary a sworn account and Notice of Lien containing the following information: (a) The name and address of the owner if that information can be determined with a reasonable effort; (b) A legal description of the real property on which the building is or was located; (c) The type of work performed; and (d) The amount of expenses incurred by the city in performing the work and the balance due. (2) Notice Filed in County Records. The City Secretary shall file the Notice of Lien along with a copy of the order of abatement issued by the Board in the deed records of the county in which the premises are located. (3) Personal Obligation of Property Owner. The expenses incurred by the City as set forth in the sworn account of the building official shall be a personal obligation of the property owner in addition to a priority lien upon the property. The City Attorney may bring an action in any court of proper jurisdiction against the owner or property to recover the costs incurred by the City. (4) Lien Shall be Valid and Privileged. Upon filing of the Notice of Lien in the Deed Records of Tarrant or Denton County, Texas, the lien shall be valid against the property so assessed. The lien shall be privileged and subordinate only to tax liens, existing special assessment liens, and previously recorded bona fide mortgage liens attached to the same property, and shall be paramount to all other liens. The lien shall continue until the assessment and all interest due and payable thereon has been paid. (5) Assessment Must be Paid. No utility service, building permit or certificate of occupancy shall be allowed on any such property until the assessment is paid and such lien is released by the City. (6) Release of Lien. After the expenses incurred by the City, as set forth in the sworn account of the building official, have been fully paid with interest of ten percent (10%) per annum from the date the work was performed, the building official shall execute a release of lien which shall be filed in the Deed Records of Tarrant or Denton County, Texas. f:\files\muni\slake\ordinanc\danger03(08-11-94) 13 SECTION XII. ADDITIONAL AUTHORITY TO SECURE CERTAIN SUBSTANDARD BUILDINGS PRIOR TO PUBLIC HEARING AND SECURE, DEMOLISH, REPAIR OR REMOVE CERTAIN DANGEROUS BUILDINGS (1) Securing of Unoccupied, Substandard Building. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Ordinance the City may secure a building if the building official determines: (a) That the building violates the minimum standards set forth in Section IV above; and (b) That the building is unoccupied or is occupied only by persons who do not have the right of possession to the building. (2) If Building Creates Immediate Danger. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Ordinance, if the City Council finds that a building is likely to immediately endanger persons or property the City Council may: (a) Order the owner of the building, the owner's agent, or the owner or occupant of the property on which the structure is located to repair, remove, or demolish the structure, or the dangerous part of the structure, within a specified time; or (b) Repair, remove, or demolish the structure, or the dangerous part of the structure, at the expense of the municipality, on behalf of the owner of the structure or the owner of the property on which the structure is located, and assess the repair, removal, or demolition expenses on the property on which the structure was located. (3) Before the eleventh (llth) day after the date the building is secured pursuant to Subsection XII(1) above, or action is ordered pursuant to Subsection XII(2)(a) above, or the building is repaired, removed or demolished pursuant to Subsection XII(2)(b) above, the building official shall give notice to the owner by: (a) Personally serving the owner with written notice; or (b) Depositing the notice in the United States mail addressed to the owner at the owner's post office address; or (c) Publishing the notice at least twice within a ten (10) day period in a newspaper of general circulation in the county in which the building is located, if personal service cannot be obtained and the owner's post office address is unknown; or f:\files\muni\stake\ordinaac\dangeM(08-11-94) 14 (d) Posting the notice on or near the front door of the building if personal service cannot be obtained and the owner's post office address is unknown; and (e) In addition to the above, depositing notice in the United States mail to all lienholders and mortgagees who can be determined from a reasonable search of instruments on file in the office of the County Clerk. (4) The notice must contain: (a) An identification, which is not required to be a legal description, of the building and the property on which it is located; (b) A description of the violation of the minimum standards present in the building; (c) A statement that the city will secure or has secured, as the case may be, the building, or that the City has taken or will take the action ordered pursuant to Subsection XII(2) above; (d) An explanation of the owner's entitlement to request a hearing about any matter relating to the City's securing, removing, demolishing or repairing of the building. (5) The City Council shall conduct a hearing at which the owner may testify or present witnesses or written information about any matter relating to the City's securing, repairing, removing or demolishing of the building, if, within thirty (30) days after the date the City has taken action pursuant to Subsections XII(1) or (2) above, the owner files with the City a written request for the hearing. The hearing shall be conducted within twenty (20) days after the date the request is filed. (6) If the City incurs expenses under this Subsection, such expenses incurred shall be a personal obligation of the property owner in addition to a priority lien upon the property, and costs shall be recovered as provided by Section X of this Section. (7) It shall be unlawful to fail to comply with an order issued pursuant to this Section. SECTION MR. This ordinance shall be cumulative of all provisions of ordinances of the City of Southlake, Texas, except where the provisions of this ordinance are in direct conflict with the provisions of such ordinances, in which event the conflicting provisions of such ordinances are hereby repealed. f:\files\muni\slake\ordinanc\danger03(08-11-94) 15 3 ' SECTION XIV. It is hereby declared to be the intention of the City Council that the phrases, clauses, sentences, paragraphs and sections of this ordinance are severable, and if any phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph or section of this ordinance shall be declared unconstitutional by the valid judgment or decree of any court of competent jurisdiction, such unconstitutionality shall not affect any of the remaining phrases, clauses, sentences, paragraphs and sections of this ordinance, since the same would have been enacted by the City Council without the incorporation in this ordinance of any such unconstitutional phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph or section. SECTION XV. 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 XVI. All rights and remedies of the City of Southlake are expressly saved as to any and all violations of the provisions of Ordinance No. 560 or any other ordinances affecting the abatement of dangerous or substandard buildings 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. f.\files\muni\slare\ordinanc\dangerO3(08-11-94) 16 1v/7 SECTION XVII. The City Secretary of the City of Southlake is hereby authorized to publish this ordinance in book or pamphlet form for general distribution among the public, and the operative provisions of this ordinance as so published shall be admissible in evidence in all courts without further proof than the production thereof. SECTION XVIH. The City Secretary of the City of Southlake is hereby directed to publish the proposed ordinance or its caption and penalty together with a notice setting out the time and place for a public hearing thereon at least ten (10) days before the second reading of this ordinance, and if this ordinance provides for the imposition of any penalty, fine or forfeiture for any violation of any of its provisions, then the City Secretary shall additionally publish this ordinance or its caption and penalty in the official City newspaper one time within ten days after passage of this ordinance, as required by Section 3.13 of the Charter of the City of Southlake. SECTION IXX. 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 THIS DAY OF , 1994. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY EFFECTIVE DATE: f.\files\muni\slakc\ordinanc\danger03(08-11-94) 17 Z)�/ U APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: City Attorney f:\files\muni\slake\ordinanc\dangcr03(W11-94) 18 ��o' -1,�F 4 City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM ' September 2, 1994 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Bob Whitehead, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Award of Bid for Sanitary Sewer Improvements for N4 Gravity Spur Force Main and Lift Station GENERAL INFORMATION The N-4 Gravity Spur, force main and lift station will serve an area from north of Southlake Blvd. (F.M. 1709) to the north side of S.H. 114 and from just east of Kimball Ave. to approximately a half mile west of Kimball Ave. (see attached map). This area includes the Wal- Mart site. Easements were negotiated with MESCO for the gravity lines, force main and lift station. In lieu of payment for the easements, the proposed bid includes constructing service lines from the existing building on the MESCO property to the lift station. City Council approved the contract with Cheatham and Associates to design Sanitary Sewer System Improvements for N4 Gravity Spur, Force Main and Lift Station at the February 15th, 1994 council meeting. Advertisement was published on July 31st and August 7th. Bids were publicly opened and read aloud on August 24th. BID TABULATION See attached bid tabulations prepared by Cheatham and Associates. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS Originally Greenway Investment Company desired to extend the sewer south of Southlake Blvd. Their engineers designed a sewer line extension and requested an add alternate (Schedule A-1) to be added onto the N-4 Gravity spur Force Main project. The add alternate amount bid for $28,199.05 making the total sewer extension $471,753.80. On Friday morning, September 2, their agent notified City staff that they needed to withdraw from the project. Therefore, the cost of the project will be $443,554.75 as seen on Subtotal (Items 1-44) on the bid tabulation. FUNDING/FISCAL IMPACT Funding for the N4 Gravity Spur project will be provided from Sewer Impact Fees. Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager N-4 Gravity Spur September 2, 1994 Page 2. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council award the bid to low bidder Southern Mechanical for $443,554.75. Please place this item on the Council's September 6th agenda for their consideration. Bw Attachments: Bid Tabulation Sheets Maps (W wpfiles\memos\n-w.bid CHEATHAM AND ASSOCIATES August 25, 1994 Mr. Bob Whitehead, P.E. Director of Public Works City of Southlake 667 N. Carroll Ave. Southlake, TX 76092 Re: Award of Bids for N4 Wal-Mart Gravity Spur Job No. 001421 Dear Mr. Whitehead: Enclosed herewith is the bid tabulation for the subject project. The project was bid on (W August 24, 1994. As shown, the low bidder was Southern Mechanical Plumbing, Inc., in the amount of$471,753.80. Therefore, we recommend that the contract be awarded to the low bidder, Southern Mechanical Plumbing, Inc. of Sunnyvale, Texas. If you have any questions, please give us a call. Respectfully, Eddie Cheatham, P.E. \soutMaMsouthem.awd Enclosure - Bid Tabulation fir' ENGINEERS a PLANNERS • SURVEYORS A Subsidiary Firm of Southwest Planning and Design, Inc. 1601 E. Lamar Blvd. - Suite 200- Arlington,Texas 76011 817/548-0696 -Metro 265-8836-Fax 817/265-8532 3 � - WNNNNNNNN jN � � � -+ O ' Z O co OD V O to A W N O 8 OD V d1 (1) m CA O M : Cp ODv D a- ao CD OD oD co aD Og 01) w 02 C2 aq 0? 00 02 0D aD 0- aD o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 " tom" X. ; n Z0 -; 00000000000000000000 - ; �o m = D DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD2o2vvvvv — (— � ' DDDDDDDD t a R° z m m < cncncncn � ww , N rA D zm � OOOOOOOOvovOO� � � � � � � � � � � � � Tvvvvvvvcncn �ncncncncncn - o -I D ..A — ... ..A — ...� - - ...� — N � � � � � NDv000000 � � 'T 1 = D —I 2 aD aD aD oD au au aD ao ao au oD ao oD w w w w w w w (n a C'n ' D OC� � TTT ? mm N � N mmTTTTTZAchNcnw W w w w w w w -{ ; '-lr 0 1 pD to (n to to !n (n In cn cn v+ cn to cn cn v) m 3 C r _� � � � � � � � � � � � � cn (n � lncncncn (� cn � fn (n� cn � 3 a %v O Z co 0) 0 OD O O T_ �_ U O fA Cl) CA In CD (n (n (n 0 ; O 7� gy90 m . JaNO �- , � ANO �- vvvvv Ov 'D � � � vv � � m z .� D o � � � '. � O °D �' . . � pODr') mmmmmmmmvvvvvvv CA C) 7C Co O x 0) A N 0 0 0 0 8 A N Ip m o p m m m m m m m m C) : m ; N -•1 DTf OooOmm - - - - OO � ANO oDrno < 0 -� Ozmmm -0 -I -_immmmv -°i -�i ►� '. '. � '. 00 � O- rni� jo � oob> ° C� fnX T -0 -0 -ixxT -0T -0 xggq tANOON � -+ � p -{ : ; CO) mmx - —i —1 -4 —I x , Oxxx- -4 xxxx o0000 -V OODQ' ANvmm z .�'o D C r- - - -1 � � mmmmm -I -000000 Dv -I w9m -i -I -ixmm vvv -0v = xmmmmmm -� -u c� fT1 �' x X X X m Z Z -i -1 -� -1 -� T _0 -0 Uxx — cn mmmznn xxxxx -1 -i -1 -� -Ix V� cn zzznxx xxxxx = = = x n H C- r < r- r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r C z ago W 'n T '�1 ;'1 'T1 ;'I 'T1 �1 'T1 TI �1 TI T 'T1 T TI T T 7n 7n T -n 7n TI T TI -n -n1 -n Z ; ; Z N W W (r W N N fT O _ N W w w W A 00 co VOtnN N (D VOAN -+ W (Dj OD (Tw V W V V (D O Z ' A ' W 41 O W D) W O co y N V O (J( W N fn (A W C) O O co O V M CA A D) N TC ; DDaC ��wCD v V C) W NNN -+ W A N C4fl) � Z 3XOtiO C ' DO O - W(r0O W C) AjW O z 000 000000000oO0 y � a)00000 0 m 5 � a 0000000000000000000000a00000000 p < (nmtC o �Z ; D 69 fA 69 N �9 GH fA 69 fA 69 EA 69 69 fA 69 EA fA 69 N W (D O A (7� tD co (r W (O t0 -'EA EA-' CT A N O (O co co o W n ; �l N N ,.,j Cr7 �I d969- - n-+ fDON tD V N (n V WO0 tD OOp�� (D N NG7 N A o W<n w K) 10 0 ' vaO� X NO) 0O) ODNOO (DO VCnA (rAAO0 -t. w ol -th, ) OONA (TIaN y ; UN )'„) v � Z O (000000 (nO0 � OtnN000 (rO000CANO00NOoAOOA V -•1 O V 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ; 00 00 O (r o 0 0 0 0010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ; 0 0 Z -3X000 („ � O O (T �! (J( A W N N O O (T !a W W A N 00 O A W N ONO V UNi O OD V Of CT C) .:i � z c '•o 000000 A W W 0000 -+ -+ � 0C) C� A A OtOOo (OO90, i, �—'' TOC O O O O O O N (O w 0 CD 0 0 N N )J O O O o 0 NNN 0 0 0 (T O 0 0 C; ;* Z d 69 N 69 69 EA 69 69 fA 69(A fA 69 (A 49 fA fA fA 69(AN W 0)49 : Ja A- W OfA A AOD � (T WNW VOD -�fA 69:' AA � � tD (O CA �I -+ W (O 0 C Q7NwN W OOI OOWUOWAANN -+ NNN (D0) V A V (D NNw 0 ; v �O �OXD O ; O O (n N (n W O V (Jf Ln O OD OD j w O N OD m m m (D O m N N V N -+ (D ; O A Oo O W O -+ ONOtO -+ 00000 W NOOOOOD W V W C!D (n UIOONW .-. -4 Go ; 000000 V O P . O O O O O OD D O o 00 " Cn M Cn o 00 N A p N •p� " 00 O o 000oAO W O O O O O O O O O O O O O O w 0000000 (n (`•) w " a j x 0 0 ; N OOW NN -+ � � (TA WNNN -+ y OA WN -+ � V lA W W NNN -+ � Z ' X co 0 Z' (T OOOA Oo Vw (T W OCT CD V W N V (D V 00 N l: l AO V A0000 -1 : Zny X ;O O O O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CC 0 0 0 0 0 DC 0 00. 69 69 69 fA fA(A fA (A ; 4rf Z; r' O fA 69 fA 69 Vi fA N fA 6) N EA 69 fA 69 69 W w fA 69 -� N W A , U - C" N W 00 Cn O) NNWQ7 (T Q) -� NW � N V (7) � AAN (n CD N (nO 0 ' v � X � •„� ;fA EA- 69- ;O N (3) W N la W W O V w co W co W N O N A (,)) OD O W Cn V Oo O OD (7) (p po 0 , O fD O co A Q) A N O (J) V V V O 4 Ln W -+ O co A 0 0 0 � OD U y N W N ; O n.) a � i O p 0 0 0 OD Q) A D( O Cn W O w (n �) O O O O A N O N O DD O N D) O Q) -1 by 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 p A O O O O o O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O N N N N N N N N N N IV N N N N W N N N N N N N N N N — X Z ' '-I x o ' z Viz ; A O 8 V (T A W -+ -+ fp V tr A W -� W W N O (D V y (D y 0 A N O W () z m Ooop0ppooaopo0oaopooppo0opop000m � d0 C7 (n ; m 000000c00000000000000000000000o p IDDW ; � �2 !2 � ;- ?� i O " fA EA fA 69 69 fA 69 fA � a rn fA w fA 69 fA W 69 fA fp fA 6�9 fA 69 69 69 69 69 to N W W -+ n O` N v m O V � y -+ � OD (1) A� � W fA fA_ (T (ram (D (D ON V (rO O ; AOoo ^-1 C" O ' T (D (D NW N WO W 0) A V Cn OW Co Ul O) N N Cn N A W vA OD OANiD co N ; Zo 00X � N cn (D U) Ln co O A w V V O N m O (T W N O A 0 0 (T O O V ()) N W 'O O -+ A -+ ON — N VO (n (n90 (A (TW OOOO CD OO -+ ONANAO9) O O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 (D CD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O In lei - Z71 3 N cn UN O W-A .0. A. A A A AAA W (q Cl) W W WWZw W 0OOwV wi AWO (o 0 m DVOCTA W ZP! m --I D oowaoao-u OOmv � - - - nc� � � c) -1 � mDpD � vvvv� 06mc � czi� czi� aiOO < oO r C) NZmPm � DDDDv � � Z � -� -� zz3pZ o m n 2 oa: m � � cncncncn� � � pxn0DCOWmm —z1Dn A s� z m z � =1 N Z Z 2 ' -< -< () O ' m : N c- a cn — — WvvvvD fncnZr v Mcn O ' -� D � = cewwww o � Dzm -i - cici (i, cin � Z p� m D v cnZ cncn CO) 03 p = -i .i < ZZOGG < vnm • m ; a C 3 N O OmD - .Dvvvv D - O -i W - - m0D 3 ;U C -p v Z A - - - - C D r - p A rn m O 0 O r D cn -i - vvvv O _ vim m : z -� a W Imo - mmmmmcn < vcn T _ — Momww MCO) ; D -4 � D .n (nv- mC 0 < z wvvw � "� O 0 ; � m � N -I O O z0m , 000rnoD0o0 pC) � cn cnw = � � -1 D m 2 � 2 � ,- ODw'' 0 � Nm OvncnO (n zD v ; < : O -< D r OrCn M - - 00 '• � � � mm O O0 :1 =l n Cl) ^ D m3 rvmmD � r -n W < rr, r—< n Z ? � D 'U cn < b 30 3 cn -T = m � m cnDD -n ra m � Z A z ch m r�r�� zzMEn Cn cn 0 0 (/) -� O �' ; mOOmm n -Di cn cn M v A A ;am m m ; L 3 O rrm < � rrrrr r rrrrrr (T1 (mT1rrr C Z (IQin T -n -n -n -n -t T cn D -n -n -n :-n -n �I Z Lf0 w U N W W _ N A ; A O l� N � N NOODD � fVON OO OWtOw Z ; w0 -+ 00O) N -+ -+ Ow0 o rn N � � _ w � _ KDXCOO v OOO 40 � � � � � A A O ONOtT -+ O -+ � ? ; = X0Z WC D p0000 00 OONOOOO V OAn ...� ZZ -•3 Ow00000000 00 o •woo0a0o6om m -caz 0000000000 00000000a0000 p < tnm : C .bb IIA ra- 0 z : r A. r EA <A 69 ffl fA(A D V OND N W�N (�O fA GH 69 AA En N Vi W N N �W� A V< :t" 841 0 IQ N ,.,.j r7l ONNANNAOV (!� t7( OO (A000A W co O ; aoN, X (7 O O O OwO � OAw V tDN N OOOW 00ji. CAON N ; S W t 0 O O O O D O 0 0 0 0 0 A O O O O O O O O O O O O A tJi� ; Z co Co O w O N 0 0 0 0 0 0 V 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0o c, — z O N O O O 0 O O O O O O N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N n ONOO (7t0 V O A A 0000 0000 (NJ( NCr0 n .:.� Z � _p ' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o vt o 0 0 0 0 0 0 o m m m O C 00000a000O 00000000000a0 ? G X z -_7 7 441, y► N N N 4 — IAD fA fA EA(A EA lA W O to ODD W AEA N N fA A. NwN (OWfvo A NN OwAW �y AN n tU., w ^-1 � (� V OwO � OA � -+ CO V 0 W o00 � NA0)�lAw V� O : .p �OXD O ; O t0 O V O Nw N ON N000CTOAwONO V O cn O ON ON 00O) Q) Ow O OOOOOOOOOCn000 -1 � 00 O O O O O w 0 0 0 0 0 0 w 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ra 0 0 N O 0000000000 (Jt 00000 a 0000000 NwN _ A 00 D I]]To-p-t N -- w A 0 0 N = W OO O N ��—' Z ' -� X OOOOOfO W (O V V W OO � LnO W 0 -1: Q) A22 z 'v Cn00000000 0000000000in0am � ' w mm 0000C) 0 ooa0O00000000 a40 - mr- 00 V A (fl(�q Gri 69 EA Gri(fl 69 to (A 69 r Z GyN�NCTA -+ U�i (fl --� ONDNy� n (T O � C) : A `•� (n � 0 0 0) 00NwN O) W w V W (O Va � NN — V W W (O (O O O° X � '-] w OQ) OOOON W � A O OOOOO (r (DNOO VwN -- '•` O) 0) 000000000 (rw0 0 O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 �O �^ .•.]O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 A — W D ro O "o D N tO CO (NO V _. 'u Z > x 00 O " tOOtp ,OADW NOO wwCOA jChONw W N Cn V WtO � wVOOA (.IfAn � ZZ � z 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 o o o 0 m p m y�7 D p 4A40 to Q% (n 69 fA to A N N(D -;'69 (� (A v►(n v (n (n(n 69 n 9 o ao � WNN ( fr — U WH9 (OwNOtirl-tA A 0 T O A � (O (O -+ V w � V �vOI CO : OooX A tN0 � O W W O W W O W w A T OD O to A O W W O N w 0 co N "'I — 'o 00w (Ow O> A A 0o A O00 W t000wA 00000 � N O O O N O 0 0 0 0 0 IQ-,.I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O C. O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O to 3 O ; - W (W NNNNNNNNK3fl) + � Z "'1 ; AL O O 1 Z -. - � O (Ow V OCnA W N -+ O (Ow V O) (7) A W N � p (Ow VOy� li W N Om , .t'7 W 3 z m CC n D ao ou oo au 0o ao 00 0o au o0 oo au rn w o0 00 0e og 00 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O r n C � vDvvovovoovvovvvovvvvv o !71 _� ; = D (� � mDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDv � � vvvvv - � z � D 3 D D D D D D D D p m < vvoov000vvovocncncncnc ww * ; N E: zm =lxxxxxxxxxxxxxv0000000wcncncncnuncn - O -I D 0xc� - - - - - - - - - - mxxxxxxov000voo � 2 D � x 0 w w w w w w w w w w w w w w W w w w W x x x x x x x x �, W 5n3 � ?1 :T1 m m ;1'I M :TI TTITmmMCA tnw wtn wtnW W W W W W W W ..:� � 4O D M D to � � � � � � � � � � cn cn cn cn cn cn cn w (n (n (n CA (A 3 > a C 3 o r' -� _ _ _ _ _ _ cn (n cn cn cn (n cn cn cn cn cn cn cn cn u) x D= (n Cl) (n cn Cl) cn cn Cl) ; Q° xoZ wmc0 - - - oornommm2mmm o . O � m A NO �- , , rnANo � V � 'U � � "0 � � � 'U -V 'U -D -UT m ; z D ; D ox � ' Dorn aoIn G� M ' A N O m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m 0 m N C x rn ovo� rnAN vv; _ J J J � y m v o o m u -u o o o o m m m w rn A, N o o oo rn o < ; p � 'U I- , , co OornANo • , 'U ; , OZmmm � -c -1mmmmv � � N . .- .- " , 3, ; ; o CO) cnx xxx -1MX -D -0T *v xxOoornAN00M O pax 4 -1 -4m- -1 '-1 -1 -ix mm000rnAN vv 5 (A ; D xNOxxx- - -Ixxxx ovvvv Dx omm z ; C r - � xx mmmmm 4 --1 vm � x WKm , -4 -lxmm xvxxvxxmmmmm v -� -� ; m X wx xxx ZZ -1 -1 � -1 -1 vvxxm -1xx 7' o I CO) cn mmmZnn xxxxx - -i -1 -1 -1x 0 (n a:Z z n x x a: x x mix o 000m � Di x x 2 i m m L 3 p D D W r < rrrrrr- r- rr- rrrr- rrrrrrrrrr- r- rrrr C mm mTmmmmmmm717nm7n ;1m 'Tl 'T1Z1mmmLnTI 'T1TITmm Z ; ,cy„ ; Z -+ , N , O A 10 !J W W (n W N N Cn O _ N W W W w A V V D) A ; 0 w co N -- -- OA VO (nNNtO Vtn A Cn -- wtO -- w Cn (n V W V -4W0 Z ; ' �_ 4. O W O) W Ow V N VO (nW NCn (7) W OOOONw o co 0 -1 M w A O N v N A (D W N -+ -- A W W W N N N A W W W N N N O A A W W W W W 22 Z ' ;--f x O D O Cn tn � wAN � � O (n W -+ (DV V -- W W � tO Va) � ON009) tnA W 0 __j ; p mOO � CU 000000o00cncnv, ininin0Qa0000cn -1 V -I -! V V V V m v < Xv C O O O O O O O O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 w (n 0 to m w w to NO r 69 69 69 69 69 6� (A 699 fA 69 69 69 69 c A Lrri 69 N 69 69 69 69 69 69 -+ (A 69 69 69 EA 69 -+ W Cn O N N (� ; c N Ln ; W NQ) A � AO) N -+ V Ww (n VNW� NwwNWOW N A W V O C 0,ON ON) tD W -+ W W N V O() O0 o CA Ln w (a AA (n -NOW� ; w CAXU� O O WwW (D VNW V A WwW wW03 Ow N n AW O Z0 NWOE n( O W a000a000 (nn0 (n (n (no0000a0 " 0 V o0n0n O (n o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (n 0 (n 0 0 0 0 0 O 9C 3Dxt�ipv 0 0 Cn A W W W N V A A W W W w V W to W W W N CA (i) A W W W W N22 Z ; _ X O 0 OOONw U) � (DO V Ow (n N -- 000Cn W OwO -- OCnANO (On � � mOO i 0000000 (n00000000000000000000 (noom 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 X (zi) ; 69(A 69 bi(A 6) 69 69 EA EA 69(A 69 69 fA Vf v X N ; 69 A 69 61 19(A -+EA 6)69 6A 69(A -- N (n (n N C� W 936 69 W W (nwV 80 oW 'AWNtD tD V (n tDOV W V " MOM A V W V V (nN (ON O OtDN W (nw ONNCnwON � wOOA O ; v � O ; O (O O (n NO A. � 00 V N (D Nw W0000W AAA CT Co O Co Ln co Ln ch ; L\ � O A ; O W O O O A (n w W Cl O O O (n O W O O O O O O O O O O O A (n O w - p �p N O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 c w � O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cl 0 0 0 0 .. N x C ; D x p z (n W N N to N N N W w w W W W CA W W w w w W W A A A A A A A A Z ' '-'� x 0r V (r (O (D (D (D (O t0 00 00 00 00 00 00 Oo 00 00 00 CO CO 00 00 O O O O O O O O n ; m ; O O O A A A A A A V V V V V V -1 0 0 0 o O O O W W W W W W W W m `^' m O O m ; 000 (A0 n (n (n0 (n00 n (n (n (n00000a000a0000a G � X �) ; 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 0) (A 7; Oo x O D ; 69 69 W 69 69 A 69 -- 69 d9 N N 69 69 -- -+ 69 E9 -+ W Ln V W N J N '-'1 --- wNWWCO � OA � NwVO � A ��� W -+ NWNA (nWtO --- NA n 7 � wwX r ; W (.WNO W (DWCornOA Wwto (D W (.WOOooW -- O) AAON O ; NNNv n ' 0) CO CD V w (n w (W CD A A (n (O - o w w A (DwA VOCD CO w CO V 0 N pwUQ` O O w0r%) C' -+ V W -+ OO W O o000 � AO �I UtWONNwO --, vw (nA Z , O V 0 W CAM A (n V NON -4 " 000o000 V O W W " wO aw (^ � y , O W O (n0o (nOCn0 (n00 (n (n (n0000000a0000000 0000L^ En � > .1.I "0 7C v b ' (n 'nc � axmoa : 2 A W (O w V 0 L" A W (O V O Cn A CA N (D Co 0 Cn Cn A W N � Z ' '� x o � G m ; A wV NwwwwwwA � O -- NAwN (OwwtDAwAO (DCOONpp O W M W W W W W W S W W O V -- o (O (n 8 O W (n W O V N N A (A O to m � � "r-' m m . w ; m NOAOOO) w00 V -+ V AW W W -+ . n -- 0WM0 V W (O (n V V v � � aO N , � f n tzn n � W 69 69 69 69 6)69 to 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 to 69 69 tA 00 O 69 69 69 (A 4AN -- -+ NN�6p9 �tpA � 6969NN N V V N --- n ' v wXm zZ ; � 00W NW jNAOCn -- AAAA69� A AONNww (DACnw V O 00 'o v0 En � A N W 69 to W (n V A O) V (n (O A W V to (MY) W Co N (r N �_ to (n O W w to AOw V CO 0 (O O N (D 84 W U) A tO w A (D V -4 oP6 - NO (D0 P � � x - - (nww W AN (O w00 (A �I W Wtn Cn - AOo -- - OtnAO W � W W (n 0 O) mCD tD tD N (n V Cn D) N N 6:P. 0 (nON VO V NNE W � O O A O O w N N N 0 (T w Cn Cn tD O O O O N O O N O co W A O N A (ncntntntnAAAAA AAAAAW W W W W W W (JZ � O O Z A W N � OtD (D �) 0Ut A W N � OCO (D VONA WN0m . 3 . zI � x � pD � zogOuauo? � OOmv � zzznn � on ?0 0 pm � v � -�lvvvvp nnp � mwlwi �izzK0z o m �? ? 2 r Nzm ' m • DDDD � p, Q, 0rz . zzz - c� "" Roz -1 � m O0xmxa) . . . . O p no? aoao m -iD N rA `< ? D Z � =i � � a7vvvvD (j)) � Zr � � W pip -0101 ;lu - 0 D 0DG� - G� O � xxxr -l -� n - DDOO � � vv_ D D v, _ 0 -n m 0 m wwww O � zm -� D -I - n (A (PUl0 o? ozNm � � � p � � cn ? -1r p -{ - o - cunt ww= v - -� � < zz < vnmT m ; > C O � � � v -� Ocncncntom vxD � nOOt7 < m M .1 a x Cl) OmzA _vv_ v_ v_o DDO -1 O :g8 n � � O OX r � C r — p A rn v z --1 y ; cn T Ogrno W 00 wvvw = Zv n 1 m1. Cl) O vm x � = �-I � � mo» O � � m G� � w � cwi, zD v < D p m -� o ', per � mm � O Ov _1 -� o (A _ r r m (1) � �' Omm D °° `�, < � rm- < �bc) p ? D 'U v m -u -p r T Z 7 -im m = n -° � -i � kw � DD � � ,wi 07 m N C � � _ _ _ = m Cl) c1) V) U) „ a z mzzm � o v ; 1 -4 tAi, 0Na X mOOm � n --i c" Co A A w ;am m m ; L > a 0 Y c W rrm < mrrrrr rrrmrrrr [[1177 ((TT11rrr c Z GQ (nT TDTTTTT TT (ADTTTTDDTTT Z 1 S Z O CD O Cn W CD W AOr (T OO OW A -w+ C)O) CDO Z 10 N -+ N r) W V (ON Oo O -+ 000N -+ 0000 o cn o _ oo -• cnw Ya = mb0 v N C p O -� O CT (O WOE --+ CnCnOO AtD -SOW � CAALa i _Ixo > c ; D O � OO (n (n A - (n A A V CD O O � N V A O O Cn (n 0 (7 -{ z 0 a) x ' 00000 (noaino o (n00000cn00000m W mOpp W 0000000000 0000000000000 p < Xn C 69 69 ` c= N p r O) d+ 99 a) Cj 69 fA 69 69 69 fA A M N Z Cn W 69 fA 69 69 69 69 69 N EA 0 O69 N w w + CA — c69W - N 00 nU ; O Of O OCD -� 40-) (n OO �) O Cn (n OO — A 00 V Cn W-4 wK) p : aX cotw O OW � (O V CD � OAN O Cn (n O O O 0) O N O U Cn W O W ; V ! O91O Q) p :N . p (np O ppppppNA00000 -1 ; pU Z C.) cc O O O A O O O O C n O W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 a O Cn O O O Cn O O O O O O Cn O O O O O O O O O O O O O N _ �_ _ (n CO _ _ C D ?' Cam.-) Cl O O O W W W W W Cn Cn C) dz� AOUNi � O � XZ ' 3XZr � � o � 000rnwr) oo oCDIC) 000OD � cn � p0 0inoo0oo000 0000 � 0o0oinoom 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cl 0 0 0 o Cl o 0 Co o O o 0 o p p n X 00 00 - °O '-"1 b♦ d♦ N V cn fA 69 T 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 J \ J c Cn Cn 69 69 69 69 EA 69 69 69 w 69 N 69 W A W N CA 4 A O (D N (n (n (n tD V to W V n w a o, () . V co OA -t D. w ON W Cn co A000 - N) (O0)WNto8N p ; � w A O OH ;0) OD o00Co 0 U) 00 N -lO V 0000 V OCO CO CD nK) 0 N ; o -1 Cn OA O � ON A A 00 Cn OOOOOOOOOOCn00 -I O O O C. O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 A O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Cl O O O O O w J _ _ N j D N Cn (D N � W W � — W ma c ; 3 a O OCn NNNNNN W W (A0 -+ O � W Cn 8to ;uZ ' :--1 X0 � � (7 ; ONO W P :N . . . . OOOO W . pOOOOA V n -1 ; W (,r7Op m . OW OCO OOw W W w O (n 00 Cn Cn 0000 V O Nm 0000000000 000000000o (nO (n X w ; 6+ 40 00 00 ,i o --1 V 4A 69 69 V 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 - J D Cn A 6969 69 69 69 69 6l 69 O GH 69 N A W EA N W N 69 A to NN W -+ NO W OCn --� A (O (DN � N -+ CnQ) N (A � n i NNX r , N N ()1 -+ CD O A W �) (O -+ -W N --� 0 W W O W OD —fA W O O W 0 ' A 00 OCn a8 blm CA co AO W ACA Cn O Cn mw WCnW � w N N ; winc O V OOCDOODN (ON V Cn OOOOOCnOo01OO V NO --I ; w (n A 'z A co a ONOOA -4M O 0000000000 Cn 00 w N J (A ; co Cn OOO (n000000 4) 0000000000000 CO ANONNN -• Q1 �! (DN WOUTAW Cn � •Z1Z i ,� X O 'z --1 -+ 0 CD V O -+ W IQO CD N A W O O N (O V 00 N W (O n � z z m ; m Cn W 8 w 00C) to " w -) A W OOW -+ A OD W - N) 0) W m � M OAt0O (OO Cn0Cn O V O (nW v0 V VMCn — A DDO OorZ �) h 6+ a -1 0 O W Cn 69 N -.+ � A 'w 69 N 69 69 W 69W6 w X -n( coO4A W 6 N W n W of v) (!D W OW NOD N N Cn NOO CA N W W A WOOD 00 wNOA W W ; 11 O) N CO W (D A Cn W OD W IV A W -+ 00 N W (n (n V A W A -� ; 'o T N -+ OD (b N -� (D 00 O �! w J W O W N O CO �I CD N A �) p Cn w (nN W (n �I CO 0) -4 O in OOOOO AA W in V N 4 W O A CD M CO N W Cn O O 4 CO O O Cn C O O A V O) O 00 0 �iri�.-- Fa F M►UN �y THOMAS M �aHAN � ,�",�'.• rlll••i �' - - -- ' =' ��© sit• ��"'�' lab, lot _ L ■� � f 1 1 ■1.1•,1 r i Y ' • r ; ` City of Southlake,Texas CITY MANAGrxR MEMORANDUM August 31, 1994 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Bob Whitehead, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Developer Agreement for Thnarron, Brenwyck Phase 2 The Developer Agreement for Timarron, Brenwyck Phase 2 Addition is attached. The Agreement contains the standard requirements for the provision of water, sewer, and streets. Usual requirements relating to performance and payment bonds, maintenance bonds, inspection fees, and park fees are included in the Agreement. A few conditions are unique to.this addition, which resulted in revisions to our standard agreement. These items are discussed below. • Page 9, Section A, PARK FEES: The Developer requested that the City of Southlake grant a 50% waiver of the park dedication fee. The Park Board considered this request at the August Park Board meeting and recommended to reject the 50% credit (see attached memo from Shana Rice). • Page 10, Section C, OFF-SITE DRAINAGE: The Developer agrees to pay a share of the culvert expense for the basin serving East Continental. Please place this Developer Agreement on the September 6th agenda for Council approval. Bob Whitehead Attachments: Memo from Shana Rice Developer Agreement Map wpfiles\memos\TimDA.Bm A City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM August 30, 1994 TO: Robert Whitehead, Director of Public Works FROM: Shana Rice, Assistant City Manager SUBJECT: Park Dedication Fee Credit -- Brenwyck Phase II Park Board'Recommendation Timarron Land Corporation has requested that the City of Southlake grant a 50% waiver of the park dedication fees required for Brenwyck Phase II. The Park Board considered this request at the August Park Board meeting and are recommending to the City Council that the request for 50% credit by Timarron for Brenwyck Phase II be rejected. The Park Board recognizes that Timarron has a significant investment in recreational amenities provided for the residents and that, when appropriate, these amenities may provide a basis for awarding credit in future phases of the development. The Park Board has concerns, however, that Brenwyck Phase II includes too many homes with too little green space in the immediate area. They believe that there should be an area near these lots which could provide recreational opportunities for children living in the homes constructed in Brenwyck Phase H. Please include this recommendation as part of the packet information for Timarron's developer's agreement. I will be happy to answer any questions you may have about the Park Board's recommendation. ^J SR r TIMARRON, BRENWYCK PHASE 2 ADDITION 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 the z € ?` Addition, to the City of Southlake Tarrant County, Texas hereinafter referred to as the "Addition," 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 lots contained within the .... g PP :::Addition and to the off-site improvements necessary to support the Addition. I. 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 subdivision completed as rapidly as possible,,the City agrees to release 3% 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 (temporary or permanent) with street names are in place. The remaining building permits shall be released as soon as the streets are complete. The Developer recognizes that Certificates of Occupancy for residential dwellings will not be issued until the supporting public works infrastructure within the Addition has been accepted by the City, and this will serve as an incentive to the Developer to see that all remaining items are completed so that final acceptance can be obtained. 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. Performance and payment bond, letters of credit or cash escrow from the prime contractor(s) or other entity reasonably acceptable to 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, letter of credit or cash escrow will be for a period of two (2) years and will be issued prior to the final City acceptance of the subdivision. The maintenance bonds, 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. E. Until the performance and payment bonds, letters of credit or cash escrow required in Paragraph C has 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 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, City shall have no liability or responsibility in connection with any such facilities. Acceptance of the facilities shall occur at such time that 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: 1. Developer agrees to pay the following: a. Inspection fees equal to three percent (3%) of the cost of the water, street, drainage and sanitary sewer facilities, on all facilities included in this agreement for which Developer awards his or her own construction contract, to be paid prior to construction of each phase and based on actual bid construction cost; b. Administrative Processing Fee equal to two percent (2%) of the cost of water, street, drainage and sanitary sewer facilities, on all -2- /zl-)-"X - 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 retesting as a result of failed tests; f. All gradation tests required to insure proper cement and/or lime stabilization. 2. The City agrees to bear the expense of: a. All nuclear density tests on the roadway subgrade (95% Standard); b. Technicians time for preparing concrete cylinders; and C. Concrete cylinder tests and concrete coring samples. The City can delay connection of buildings to service lines or water mains constructed under this Agreement until said water mains and service lines have been completed to the satisfaction of and accepted 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 subdivision 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 for the City and this Agreement shall not be considered in effect until such City Attorney has approved the instrument. Approval by the City shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. -3- �Ob_3- - 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 of Southlake regardless of such company's authorization to do business in Texas. Approval by the City shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. 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 approved by the City. Further, the Developer agrees to complete this installation in accordance with current ordinance 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, approved by the City Engineer, and made part of the final plat as approved by the City Council. The Developer hereby agrees to fully comply with all EPA requirements relating to the planning, permitting and management of storm water which may be in force at the time that development proposals are being presented for approval by the City. C. STREETS: 1. The street construction in the Addition shall conform to the requirements in Ordinance No. 217. Streets will be installed in accordance with plans and specifications to be prepared by the Developer's engineer and approved by the City Engineer. 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 `"' -4- acceptance of the Addition; b) Installation of all street signs designating the names of the streets inside the subdivision, said signs to be of a type, size, color and design standard generally employed by the Developer and approved by the City in accordance with City ordinances: c) Installation of all regulatory signs recommended by the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices and as directed 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 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. D. 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 approved 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. E. 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 -5- /dJ-7 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 subdivision. 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 be paid to the City prior to acceptance of the Addition. F. AMENITIES: It is understood by and between the City 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. G. USE OF PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY: It is understood by and between the City and Developer that the Developer may provide unique amenities within public right-of-way, such as landscaping, irrigation, lighting, etc., for the enhancement of the Addition. The Developer agrees to maintain these amenities until such responsibility is turned over to a homeowners association. The Developer 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 City against all such claims and demands. H. START OF CONSTRUCTION: Before the construction of the streets,and the water, sewer, or drainage facilities can begin, the following must take place: -6- 1. 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 stamped "Released for Construction" by the City Engineer must be submitted. 3. All fees required to be paid to the City. 4. Developer's Agreement executed. 5. The Developer, or Contractor shall furnish to the City a policy of general liability insurance, naming the City as co-insured, prior to commencement of any work. 6. A pre-construction meeting between Developer and City is required. III. GENERAL PROVISIONS: A. Developer covenants and agrees to and does hereby fully indemnify, hold harmless and defend the City, its officers, agents, servants and employees, from all claims, suits or causes of action of any nature whatsoever, whether real or asserted, brought for or on account of any injuries or damages to persons or property, including death, resulting from or in any way connected with the agreement or the construction of the improvements or facilities described herein; which indemnity, shall terminate upon acceptance by the City of such improvements or facilities; and in addition, the Developer covenants to indemnify, hold harmless and defend the City, its officers, agents, servants and employees, from and against any and all claims, suits or causes of action of any nature whatsoever, brought for or on account of injuries or damages to persons or property, including death, resulting from any failure to properly safeguard the work, or on account of any act, intentional or otherwise, neglect or misconduct of the Developer, its contractors, subcontractors, agents, servants or employees, which indemnity, shall terminate upon acceptance by the City of such improvements or facilities. B. Venue of any action brought hereunder shall be in Fort Worth, Tarrant County, Texas. C. Approval by the City Engineer or other City employee of any plans, designs or specifications submitted by the Developer pursuant to this agreement shall not constitute or be deemed to be a release of the responsibility and liability of the Developer, his engineer, employees, officers or agents for the accuracy and competency of their design and specifications. Such approval shall not be deemed to be an assumption of such responsibility and liability by the City for -7- any defect in the design and specifications prepared by the consulting engineer, his officers, agents, servants or employees, it being the intent of the parties that approval by the City Engineer signifies the City's approval on only the general design concept of the improvements to be constructed. In this connection, the Developer shall for a period of two (2) years after the acceptance by the City of Southlake of the completed construction project, indemnify and hold harmless the City, its officers, agents, servants and employees, from any loss, damage, liability or expense on account of damage to property and injuries, including death, to any and all persons which may arise out of any defect, deficiency or negligence of the engineer's designs and specifications incorporated into any improvements constructed in accordance therewith, and the Developer shall defend at his own expense any 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 thereof or any interest herein, shall not be assigned by the Developer without the express written consent of the City Manager, which shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. E. On all facilities included in this agreement for which the Developer awards his 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. F. Work performed under the agreement shall be completed within two (2) years from the date thereof. In the event the work is not completed within the two (2) year period, the City may, at its election, draw 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 I.F. 1. The purchase of tangible personal property, other than machinery or equipment and its accessories, repair, and replacement parts, for use in �." -8- 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 e ressly requires the specific service to be provided or purc ed by the person performing the Agreement; or b. the service is int g to the performance of the Agreemen . IV. OTHER ISSUES: A. ARK FEES: 7ri0 eras<tc� a`: ar�: ees;gin cn ;< sr >: ax ::: 8 : . .... ::..:::::: xsxon flrd Article VI Pd'€iiiRatz1 ::::.': t�eefi : :::.::........,. ::.}, :: ::::::::.:::::::::::::.::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::.:::.:.: ts:> f:: :;1: :: � ::fi ::a: ota1<:r t d:::: :f <: f:;. flQ:>>142 ....................... .............................................................. ........ .............................................................................. ........ » f3 Subj e,.t to this Agr-eefne.,t the Devel,pef agfees t p afk roes ; „r ,. nmaii.d w itl�ee-No. 493 (Subdivision Ofd.), Arccele V11, D.,,.L and Deefea4ien -Pedie-ation Requirements. The Developer- and the Gity aeknowledge that the ixccccitio" @et 6 2ti spaee. in E9nSiderzrcivn--vr-the—ca?-icniz-rcrcv-vc installed faf the feefeational benefit of residents of the Addition, the Developef efedit toward the fequir-ed par-le fees for- a r-esulfing fee e $28 nnn i112 lets v $5 o Thefe are 112 lets in Br- e-lE Phase 2 The Gouneil hereby, „ts a Snow oast f; Et fesulting v e Pafk Fee f$29 f nnn thisagfeeffie . t B. TREE PRESERVATION ORDINANCE: All construction activities shall meet the requirements of the Tree preservation Ordinance 585. -9- � 1 -l/ C. OFF-SITE DRAINAGE: ..... .......... ... .. . ..... ............... ..... ..... ........... .. ... ........................ . ........ ............ .......... W ........ ................ SIGNED AND EFFECTIVE on the date last set forth below. DEVELOPER: By: Title: Date: CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS By: Gary Fickes, Mayor ATTEST: Sandra LeGrand, City Secretary Date: c:I wpfilesIdewagrVimaron bre -10- REQUIREMENTS FOR IRREVOCABLE LETTER OF CREDIT f I 1 The Letter of Credit (L of C) must have a duration of at least one year. 2. The L of C 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 L of C must be issued by an 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. The L of C must be issued by a bank that has a minimum capital ratio of six (6%) percent, and has been profitable for each of the last two consecutive years. 5. The customer must provide the City with supporting financial information on the bank to allow the City to ascertain requirements are met. Suitable financial information would be the previous two (2) years December 31 Call Reports submitted to the FDIC and audited financial statements. 6. Partial drawings against L of C 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 L of C. 9. Expiring letter of credit must be replaced by substitute letters of credit at least 30 days prior to the expiration date on the L of C held by the City. c:IwpfilesldevagreeITimaron.bre -11- -u 7 �r x w 3mw2 3c m sm 4C a - Im w P�- r cN R� P JD D2 AI 3N X 7 12A)C 2A1 10 2A2 2A5 2A2 2 L •Ot 4 U ' x A P 1, 4, ♦ M }i.KKr w-are ` Dt J >C 2C2A 7C2 =A 2C1 f N'p•NILL' I NE y k ,f in M 5C" 1 W � f m s 1 SAI I � lA1 fKT tri/1WrTM 1 JC 30 3:7 2 1A If „ >M I 1 1 i Y ( fawKv M10" MAR y f 1 0 � , I , I I >,n 1 I f w I I J( 7N 1 w f 1 ID t• , 3 1 (3A1 � „ 1 R 2K 39 wa p1'1' IYf b IIPOIIT ' M TRACT MAP )A 1 1A2 IA,,, 1 A f.� 1141 Nq, FS 18j 0' I i E, ............. O-W 42 . ......--.-.-.-- ....m .. R • -. .. MUM rill. Li STREET .. ..... ................... d 14 J;J, it s4 ............... f if�1 q'i n�H P fo ip"! rz t if,a 21 V sit la z 9 z M2 1 �} i �;t 4Q�P d t� 27Sa l a i, a aka 3 �„ I City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM September 1, 1994 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Bob Whitehead, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Developer Agreement for White Chapel Addition Attached is a draft Developer Agreement for White Chapel Addition. White Chapel Addition is located just east of Pine Drive and just south of Lilac Lane. White Chapel Addition is a replat of Lot 2 of White Chapel Place with the existing house to remain on Lot 2R1. This agreement contains the standard requirements for providing public infrastructure; water, sewer, drainage, and streets. The standard performance bonds, maintenance bonds, inspection and administration fees, and park fees are included. There are three unique conditions which need to be called to Council's attention. • Page 9, Section A. OFF SITE SANITARY SEWER: Because a sanitary sewer is available within 500 feet of this Addition, Council did upon plat approval, strop l suggest to the Developer that the sewer be extended to the Addition. The off-site sewer ,u would need to cross three properties. The Developer has told Staff that two of the three have agreed to an easement, however, one property owner is not cooperating with the Developer. Staff encouraged the Developer to continue to negotiate, however, the Developer wanted to bring the Developer Agreement to Council at this meeting. • Page 9, Section The Addition is creating five new lots as the sixth lot will contain th s mg iom . erefore, the Park Fee will be for five lots at $500 each for a total of $2,500. • Page 10, PERIMETER STREET FEE: There is no perimeter street fee as the Addition only abuts Pine Drive at the intersection of Pine Drive and Lilac Lane, and the Developer will be reconstructing that intersection. Council may note that of the five new lots: • Lot 2R4 is 1.45 acres, • Lot 2R5 is 3.92 acres, and • Lot 2R6 is 2.18 acres. The lots have all successfully passed the percolation test for a septic system. Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager White Chapel Addition Developer Agreement September 1, 1994 Page 2. Staff would recommend that the sanitary sewer is the desirable alternative because of the close proximity of the existing sewer. However, septic system in this low density development could be approved. Please place this on the September 6th agenda for Council consideration. BW/sm Attachment: Developer Agreement Map WHITES CHAPEL ADDITION 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 the "Nip" Addition, to the City of Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas, hereinafter referred to as the "Addition," 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 lots contained within the #+ Addition and to the off-site improvements necessary to support the Addition. I. 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 subdivision 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 (temporary or permanent) with street names are in place. The remaining building permits shall be released as soon as the streets are complete. The Developer recognizes that Certificates of Occupancy for residential dwellings will not be issued until the supporting public works infrastructure within the Addition has been accepted by the City, and this will serve as an incentive to the Developer to see that all remaining items are completed so that final acceptance can be obtained. 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. Performance and payment bond, letters of `�• credit or cash escrow from the prime contractor(s) or other entity reasonably acceptable to 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, letter of credit or cash escrow will be for a period of two (2) years and will be issued prior to the final City acceptance of the subdivision. The maintenance bonds, 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. E. Until the performance and payment bonds, letters of credit or cash escrow required in Paragraph C has 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 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, City shall have no liability or responsibility in connection with any such facilities. Acceptance of the facilities shall occur at such time that 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: 1. Developer agrees to pay the following: a. Inspection fees equal to three percent (3%) of the cost of the water, street, drainage and sanitary sewer facilities, on all facilities included in this agreement for which Developer awards his or her own construction contract, to be paid prior to construction of each phase and based on actual bid construction cost; b. Administrative Processing Fee equal to two percent (2%) of the cost of water, street, drainage and sanitary sewer facilities, on all -2- 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 retesting as a result of failed tests; f. All gradation tests required to insure proper cement and/or lime stabilization. 2. The City agrees to bear the expense of: a. All nuclear density tests on the roadway subgrade (95% Standard); b. Technicians time for preparing concrete cylinders; and C. Concrete cylinder tests and concrete coring samples. The City can delay connection of buildings to service lines or water mains constructed under this Agreement until said water mains and service lines have been completed to the satisfaction of and accepted 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 subdivision 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 for the City and this Agreement shall not be considered in effect until such City Attorney has approved the instrument. Approval by the City shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. -3- 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 of Southlake regardless of such company's authorization to do business in Texas. Approval by the City shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. 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 approved by the City. Further, the Developer agrees to complete this installation in accordance with current ordinance 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, approved by the City Engineer, and made part of the final plat as approved by the City Council. The Developer hereby agrees to fully comply with all EPA requirements relating to the planning, permitting and management of storm water which may be in force at the time that development proposals are being presented for approval by the City. C. STREETS: 1. The street construction in the Addition shall conform to the requirements in Ordinance No. 217. Streets will be installed in accordance with plans and specifications to be prepared by the Developer's engineer and approved by the City Engineer. 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 `�.. -4- acceptance of the Addition; b) Installation of all street signs designating .. the names of the streets inside the subdivision, said signs to be of a type, size, color and design standard generally employed by the Developer and approved by the City in accordance with City ordinances: c) Installation of all regulatory signs recommended by the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices and as directed 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 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. D. 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 approved 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. E. 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 `'�,� -5- 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 subdivision. 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 be paid to the City prior to acceptance of the Addition. F. AMENITIES: It is understood by and between the City 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. G. USE OF PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY: It is understood by and between the City and Developer that the Developer may provide unique amenities within public right-of-way, such as landscaping, irrigation, lighting, etc., for the enhancement of the Addition. The Developer agrees to maintain these amenities until such responsibility is turned over to a homeowners association. The Developer 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 City against all such claims and demands. H. START OF CONSTRUCTION: Before the construction of the streets,and the water, sewer, or drainage facilities can begin, the following must take place: ` ,,,� -6- 1. 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 stamped "Released for Construction" by the City Engineer must be submitted. 3. All fees required to be paid to the City. 4. Developer's Agreement executed. 5. The Developer, or Contractor shall furnish to the City a policy of general liability insurance, naming the City as co-insured, prior to commencement of any work. 6. A pre-construction meeting between Developer and City is required. III. GENERAL PROVISIONS: A. Developer covenants and agrees to and does hereby fully indemnify, hold harmless and defend the City, its officers, agents, servants and employees, from all claims, suits or causes of action of any nature whatsoever, whether real or asserted, brought for or on account of any injuries or damages to persons or property, including death, resulting from or in any way connected with the agreement or the construction of the improvements or facilities described herein; which indemnity, shall terminate upon acceptance by the City of such improvements or facilities; and in addition, the Developer covenants to indemnify, hold harmless and defend the City, its officers, agents, servants and employees, from and against any and all claims, suits or causes of action of any nature whatsoever, brought for or on account of injuries or damages to persons or property, including death, resulting from any failure to properly safeguard the work, or on account of any act, intentional or otherwise, neglect or misconduct of the Developer, its contractors, subcontractors, agents, servants or employees, which indemnity, shall terminate upon acceptance by the City of such I improvements or facilities. B. Venue of any action brought hereunder shall be in Fort Worth, Tarrant County, Texas. C. Approval by the City Engineer or other City employee of any plans, designs or specifications submitted by the Developer pursuant to this agreement shall not constitute or be deemed to be a release of the responsibility and liability of the Developer, his engineer, employees, officers or agents for the accuracy and competency of their design and specifications. Such approval shall not be deemed to be an assumption of such responsibility and liability by the City for ,�. -7- -I any defect in the design and specifications prepared by the consulting engineer, •- his officers, agents, servants or employees, it being the intent of the parties that approval by the City Engineer signifies the City's approval on only the general design concept of the improvements to be constructed. In this connection, the Developer shall for a period of two (2) years after the acceptance by the City of Southlake of the completed construction project, indemnify and hold harmless the City, its officers, agents, servants and employees, from any loss, damage, liability or expense on account of damage to property and injuries, including death, to any and all persons which may arise out of any defect, deficiency or negligence of the engineer's designs and specifications incorporated into any improvements constructed in accordance therewith, and the Developer shall defend at his own expense any 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 thereof or any interest herein, shall not be assigned by the Developer without the express written consent of the City Manager, which shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. E. On all facilities included in this agreement for which the Developer awards his 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. F. Work performed under the agreement shall be completed within two (2) years from the date thereof. In the event the work is not completed within the two (2) year period, the City may, at its election, draw 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 I.F. 1. The purchase of tangible personal property, other than machinery or equipment and its accessories, repair, and replacement parts, for use in -8- 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. IV. OTHER ISSUES: A. OFF-SITE SANITARY SEWER: velt� :: ::<.;;:.;:.;:.::.::.::.:;:;:.;:.;:.;:.;:.;;;:.::.:::::::::::.. wexa t ::::.....................:::::::::::.:....::::::::::::::::: 1�: :::.::. ::.:::::: ::.:::: C11 ..::...::: is i:•:•:::::::nii•/:i::t iiiiiiii:•:::•:i::i::i::i::::.............................................. . all 4If tf€P B. OFF-SITE DRAINAGE: The Developer understands that the Drainage Ordinance, Section 6.06-B, requires that each development contribute on a pro-rata basis towards the cost of replacing critical drainage structures downstream from the development. This development is within the basin served by the box culvert in art The Developer agrees to pay their share of the culvert expense prior to the beginning of construction. C. PARK FEES: The Developer agrees to pay park fees in conformance with Ordinance No. 483 (Subdivision Ord.), Article VII, Park and Recreation Dedication Requirements. The Addition consists of lots for a total required park fee of00. .. -9- 9. PERIMETER STP,,:EET- ORDINANCE The Develepef agfees to pay the Per-imetef Street Fee of $50,000/mile, . D. TREE PRESERVATION ORDINANCE: All construction activities shall meet the requirements of the Tree preservation Ordinance 585. SIGNED AND EFFECTIVE on the date last set forth below. DEVELOPER: By: Title: Date: CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS By: Gary Fickes, Mayor ATTEST: Sandra LeGrand, City Secretary D ate: c:1 wpfilesWevagreO white.cpl -10- REQUIREMENTS FOR IRREVOCABLE LETTER OF CREDIT 1. The Letter of Credit (L of C) must have a duration of at least one year. 2. The L of C 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 L of C must be issued by an 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 L of C must be issued by a bank that has a minimum capital ratio of six (6%) percent, and has been profitable for each of the last two consecutive years. 5. The customer must provide the City with supporting financial information on the bank to allow the City to ascertain requirements are met. Suitable financial information would be the previous two (2) years December 31 Call Reports submitted to the FDIC and audited financial statements. 6. Partial drawings against L of C 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 L of C. 9. Expiring letter of credit must be replaced by substitute letters of credit at least 30 days prior to the expiration date on the L of C held by the City. -11- _ . | ' i | | � | | ! | � | ! ` City of Southlake,Texas ffl±7� MANAGER MEMORANDUM August 31, 1994 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Bob Whitehead, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Developer Agreement for Oak Tree Estates Addition The Developer Agreement for Oak Tree Estates Addition is attached. The Agreement contains the standard requirements for the provision of water, sewer, and streets. Usual requirements relating to performance and payment bonds, maintenance bonds, inspection fees, and park fees are included in the Agreement. A few conditions are unique to this addition, which resulted in revisions to our standard agreement. These items are discussed below. • Page 9, OFF-SITE DRAINAGE: "Developer is installing a culvert and will be due Pro Rata for the drainage structure as per Section 6.06-A. Adjacent Down Stream Structures of the Drainage Ordinance 605. Developer also agrees to share the expense of the box culvert in East Continental according to Drainage Ordinance 605, Section 6.06-B. • Page 10, Section C, PARK FEES: The Developer has agreed to pay park fees in conformance Ordinance 483. There are 123 lots in Oak Tree Estates making a total park fee o 61,5 • Page 10, Section D, PERIMETER STREET ORDINANCE: Oak Tree Estates Addition abuts South Carrol roximately 1,269.28 feet. The Developer agrees to pay the Perimeter Street $12,0 . Please place this Developer Agreement on the September 6th agenda for Council approval. 6�-14, Bob Whitehead Attachment: Developer Agreement Map wpfiles\memos\o,*.tree OAK TREE ESTATES ADDITION 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 the l # s' Addition, to the City of Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas, hereinafter referred ,o..as..Arlie "Addition," 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 lots contained within the Addition and to the off-site Pp ......:::::..:::::::::. .......... ....._..... improvements necessary to support the Addition. 1. 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 subdivision 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 (temporary or permanent) with street names are in place. The remaining building permits shall be released as soon as the streets are complete. The Developer recognizes that Certificates of Occupancy for residential dwellings will not be issued until the supporting public works infrastructure within the Addition has been accepted by the City, and this will serve as an incentive to the Developer to see that all remaining items are completed so that final acceptance can be obtained. 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. Performance and payment bond, letters of credit or cash escrow from the prime contractor(s) or other entity reasonably acceptable to 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, letter of credit or cash escrow will be for a period of two (2) years and will be issued prior to the final City acceptance of the subdivision. The maintenance bonds, 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. E. Until the performance and payment bonds, letters of credit or cash escrow required in Paragraph C has 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 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, City shall have no liability or responsibility in connection with any such facilities. Acceptance of the facilities shall occur at such time that 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: 1. Developer agrees to pay the following: a. Inspection fees equal to three percent (3%) of the cost of the water, street, drainage and sanitary sewer facilities, on all facilities included in this agreement for which Developer awards his or her own construction contract, to be paid prior to construction of each phase and based on actual bid construction cost; b. Administrative Processing Fee equal to two percent (2%) of the cost of water, street, drainage and sanitary sewer facilities, on all -2- AG - 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 retesting as a result of failed tests; f. All gradation tests required to insure proper cement and/or lime stabilization. 2. The City agrees to bear the expense of: a. All nuclear density tests on the roadway subgrade (95% Standard); b. Technicians time for preparing concrete cylinders; and C. Concrete cylinder tests and concrete coring samples. The City can delay connection of buildings to service lines or water mains constructed under this Agreement until said water mains and service lines have been completed to the satisfaction of and accepted 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 subdivision 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 for the City and this Agreement shall not be considered in effect until such City Attorney has approved the instrument. Approval by the City shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. -3- �� - �'. Any surety company through which a bond is written shall be a surety company duly authorized to do business in the State of Texas, provided that the City, through the City Manager, shall retain the right to reject any surety company as a surety for any work under this or any other Developer's Agreement within the City of Southlake regardless of such company's authorization to do business in Texas. Approval by the City shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. 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 approved by the City. Further, the Developer agrees to complete this installation in accordance with current ordinances and shall be responsible for 1 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, approved by the City Engineer, and made part of the final plat as approved by the City Council. The Developer hereby agrees to fully comply with all EPA requirements relating to the planning, permitting and management of storm water which may be in force at the time that development proposals are being presented for approval by the City. C. STREETS: 1. The street construction in the Addition shall conform to the requirements in Ordinance No. 217. Streets will be installed in accordance with plans and specifications to be prepared by the Developer's engineer and approved by the City Engineer. 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 -4- acceptance of the Addition; b) Installation of all street signs designating the names of the streets inside the subdivision, said signs to be of a type, size, color and design standard generally employed by the Developer and approved by the City in accordance with City ordinances: c) Installation of all regulatory signs recommended by the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices and as directed 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 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. D. 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 approved 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. E. 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 �'`"' -5- 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 subdivision. 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 be paid to the City prior to acceptance of the Addition. F. AMENITIES: It is understood by and between the City 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. .. G. USE OF PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY: It is understood by and between the City and Developer that the Developer may provide unique amenities within public right-of-way, such as landscaping, irrigation, lighting, etc., for the enhancement of the Addition. The Developer agrees to maintain these amenities until such responsibility is turned over to a homeowners association. The Developer 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 City against all such claims and demands. H. START OF CONSTRUCTION: Before the construction of the streets,and the water, sewer, or drainage facilities can begin, the following must take place: -6- 14-'!��-7 1. 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 stamped "Released for Construction" by the City Engineer must be submitted. 3. All fees required to be paid to the City. 4. Developer's Agreement executed. 5. The Developer, or Contractor shall furnish to the City a policy of general liability insurance, naming the City as co-insured, prior to commencement of any work. 6. A pre-construction meeting between Developer and City is required. III. GENERAL PROVISIONS: A. Developer covenants and agrees to and does hereby fully indemnify, hold harmless and defend the City, its officers, agents, servants and employees, from all claims, suits or causes of action of any nature whatsoever, whether real or asserted, brought for or on account of any injuries or damages to persons or property, including death, resulting from or in any way connected with the '�,.. agreement or the construction of the improvements or facilities described herein; which indemnity, shall terminate upon acceptance by the City of such improvements or facilities; and in addition, the Developer covenants to indemnify, hold harmless and defend the City, its officers, agents, servants and employees, from and against any and all claims, suits or causes of action of any nature whatsoever, brought for or on account of injuries or damages to persons or property, including death, resulting from any failure to properly safeguard the work, or on account of any act, intentional or otherwise, neglect or misconduct of the Developer, its contractors, subcontractors, agents, servants or employees, which indemnity, shall terminate upon acceptance by the City of such improvements or facilities. B. Venue of any action brought hereunder shall be in Fort Worth, Tarrant County, Texas. C. Approval by the City Engineer or other City employee of any plans, designs or specifications submitted by the Developer pursuant to this agreement shall not constitute or be deemed to be a release of the responsibility and liability of the Developer, his engineer, employees, officers or agents for the accuracy and competency of their design and specifications. Such approval shall not be deemed to be an assumption of such responsibility and liability by the City for �'`' -7- any defect in the design and specifications prepared by the consulting engineer, his officers, agents, servants or employees, it being the intent of the parties that approval by the City Engineer signifies the City's approval on only the general design concept of the improvements to be constructed. In this connection, the Developer shall for a period of two (2) years after the acceptance by the City of Southlake of the completed construction project, indemnify and hold harmless the City, its officers, agents, servants and employees, from any loss, damage, liability or expense on account of damage to property and injuries, including death, to any and all persons which may arise out of any defect, deficiency or negligence of the engineer's designs and specifications incorporated into any improvements constructed in accordance therewith, and the Developer shall defend at his own expense any 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 thereof or any interest herein, shall not be assigned by the Developer without the express written consent of the City Manager, which shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. E. On all facilities included in this agreement for which the Developer awards his 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. F. Work performed under the agreement shall be completed within two (2) years from the date thereof. In the event the work is not completed within the two (2) year period, the City may, at its election, draw 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 I.F. 1. The purchase of tangible personal property, other than machinery or equipment and its accessories, repair, and replacement parts, for use in -8- 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. IV. OTHER ISSUES: A. OFF-SITE DRAINAGE: L �� >:::::>::>::>::>::>::».:>:::::::>: The Developer understands that Drainage Ordinance 605, Section 6.06-B, requires that each development contribute on a pro-rata basis towards the cost of replacing critical drainage structures downstream from the development. This development is within the basin served by the box culvert ina ............................................ ........................................... ............................................ Developer agrees to pay their share of the culvert expense prior to the final acceptance of the Addition. B. OFF-SITE WATER: Water facilities will be installed in accordance with plans and specifications to be prepared by the Developer's engineer and approved by the City. Further, the Developer agrees to complete this installation in accordance with current ordinance 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. -9- /D�/o C. PARK FEES: The Developer agrees to pay park fees in conformance with Ordinance No. 483 (Subdivision Ord.), Article VII, Park and Recreation Dedication Requirements. The Addition consists of * lots for a total required park fee of y Q . D. PERIMETER STREET ORDINANCE: The Developer agrees to pay the Perimeter Street Fee of $50,000/mile, in accordance with Section IV, Paragraph B, sub-paragraph 2 of Ordinance No. 494. Approximately 1 feet of the development abuts on '' € t which will require a Perimeter Street Fee of $ zi..... E. TREE PRESERVATION ORDINANCE: All construction activities shall meet the requirements of the Tree preservation Ordinance 585. SIGNED AND EFFECTIVE on the date last set forth below. DEVELOPER: By: Title: Date: CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS By: Gary Fickes, Mayor ATTEST: Sandra LeGrand, City Secretary Date: c.•I wpfrlesldevagreeloak ire -10- REQUIREMENTS FOR IRREVOCABLE LETTER OF CREDIT 1. The Letter of Credit (L of C) must have a duration of at least one year. 2. The L of C 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 L of C must be issued by an 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 L of C must be issued by a bank that has a minimum capital ratio of six (6%) percent, and has been profitable for each of the last two consecutive years. 5. The customer must provide the City with supporting financial information on the bank to allow the City to ascertain requirements are met. Suitable financial information would be the previous two (2) years December 31 Call Reports submitted to the FDIC and audited financial statements. 6. Partial drawings against L of C 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 L of C. 9. Expiring letter of credit must be replaced by substitute letters of credit at least 30 days prior to the expiration date on the L of C held by the City. -11- /O/6-/z pl • M>:� • ri�a, ® ., ©tom r fi�li,�,, 1���'�, �` ' _ •.rR� =i ' rrt.�.c�a ��� �� � ■i1i li■�11��!► �� ��r.1 SIB©■ . • � r . , .r , .czi i V Lj W 1 y� � '■ 1013 '~ rim H Q.. _ IAIY0 OOOMISIM Q f • wO,t,/„OM,f SI •'Ii IM, vOw•10000 J W }}}I��• ' • •. O _, f - j 4. QO or Ct tl Do It it 1 —�• ( 1—�� � ! L � t t y w t r. J •: ri 61 ..r ' •.,..r w• f I .I�♦ as /� 'A a � w _ ^ � - r`� �t r +\ as ` f \ ` ` • `� � � . 1 � 1 •I 1 1� - �� — - Ire__w..brow se-- r � � _ M••Ia ----- —7ni{7ty— - j�bildi3---HInot --- -- -- ol City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM ffirff September 2, 1994 TO: Curtis Hawk, City Manager FROM: Sandra L. LeGrand, City Secretary SUBJECT: Request for Variance to Ordinance No. 527 Firearms. Cub Scout BB Gun Shooting Range. Mr. David W. Callahan, Boy Scout Pack 507 has requested permission for a permit to conduct their annual "Turkey Shoot". A permit was granted last year during this time frame. Instead of holding the "shoot" at the Intermediate School, this year they have made arrangements to hold the event at Camp Burnett in Southlake, on October 8th and 9th, 1994. I have attached for your review a copy of the letter the City received from Mr. Callahan as well as drawing of the area where the shoot will be held. If you have questions, please do not hesitate to let me know. h",&-),1.1/ / /sl City of Southlake, Texas A PERMIT OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS, GRANTING APPROVAL FOR AN ARCHERY AND BB GUN SHOOTING RANGE; SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS LISTED HEREIN; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. I . In accordance with Ordinance No. 527, Section 4 , the City Council finds that the applicant represents a responsible organization and that the request for a permit is reasonable and is in the best interest of the public . II . A Permit is hereby granted for the Archery and BB Gun Shooting Range at Camp Burnett, subject to the following specific requirements and special conditions : 1 . The applicant shall receive permission from Camp Burnett . 2 . The applicant shall comply with any down-range safety requirements established by the Director of Public Safety for the City of Southlake . 3 . This permit shall be for October 8 and 9 , 1994 . III . This permit shall become effective on the date of approval by the City Council . PASSED AND APPROVED THIS THE DAY OF 1994 . CITY OF SOUTHLAKE Mayor Gary Fickes ATTEST : Sandra L. LeGrand City Secretary b:PERMIT2.BB/0RD/RES/kb August 15, 1994 RECEIVED David W. Callahan ;-' ��"� Pack 507, BSA 2411 Taylor CITY SECRETARY Southlake, TX 76092 Mr. Curtis Hawk Southlake City Manager 667 N. Carroll Southlake, TX 76092 Dear Mr. Hawk, I live in Emerald Estates and belong to Cub Scout Pack 507 of Johnson Ele- mentary School. I am the Packs, Boy Scouts of America trained, BB gun Range Officer. Under the advice of Mr. Malcolm Jackson, I am writing you concerning Ordinance No. 527. Specifically, under Section 4, we wish to solicit a permit to operate a Cub Scout BB gun shooting range. On October 8th and 9th, 1994 we wish to conduct our annual "Turkey Shoot." I have arranged space, on the open grounds,at Camp Burnett for those days. I will erect my range in a secluded area on the northern portion,facing north. It will be arranged to allow participants an entry and an exit from the south. I am enclosing a diagram and literature pertaining to location, construction and operation of a Cub Scout BB gun range. I consider myself trained and experienced. I have the mindset that if an activity cannot be done safely and well, that I will pack up and go home. I wish to offer our scouts a fun activity and responsible training. In conclusion, Mr. Hawk, I thank you and the council's kind consideration in this matter. If you wish me to be present at your next work session please call me at 488-4646. Due to work I may not be available for the September council meeting. Sincerely yours, David W. Callahan Enclosures /0a -J V -1 �- flu '. + P �b SCE n A � A Ica - � RANGE OFFICER DOS AND DON'TS 1. ALWAYS PUT THE SAFETY OF YOUR STUDENTS AHEAD OF EVERYTHING ELSE. 2. NEVER SHOOT AT ANYTHING OTHER THAN PAPER TARGETS. Remember that B B's ricochet! 3. WORK AT THE AGE LEVEL OF YOUR STUDENTS. DON'T TALK AT AN ADULT LEVEL TO 9 YEAR OLDS. 4. GIVE ADULTS WITH YOUR STUDENTS A CONSTRUCTIVE JOB TO DO TO HELP. o Ll ta► f� 5. NEVER TRY TO RUN A RANGE BY YOURSELF, ALWAYS HAVE AT LEAST TWO OTHER LINE OFFICERS WITH YOU. 6. DON'T ALLOW OTHER ADULTS TO INTIMIDATE YOU. YOU ARE IN CHARGE. rr 7. MAKE EYE CONTACT WITH THE STUDENTS YOU ARE TEACHING. 8. DO NOT ALLOW HORSEPLAY BY ANYONE ON.THE RANGE. 9. IF ANYONE CAN NOT FOLLOW THE RULES THEY ARE TO LEAVE THE RANGE IMMEDIATELY. This includes adults. 10. IF STUDENTS HAVE IDEAS THAT YOU DON'T CONSIDER SAFE, GENTLY BUT FIRMLY POINT OUT THAT SAFETY COMES FIRST, LAST AND ALWAYS. i pia CODE Of THE DAISY " BB"" RIFLEMAN • Treat every gun as if it were loaded and ready to shoot. r • Never carry a gun into your home, camp or public place loaded or cocked. • Always be sure your gun barrel is clean and not plugged. • Carry your gun so you can control the direction of the muzzle, even if you stumble. • Be sure of your target before you pull the trigger. • Never point a gun at anything you do not want to shoot. • Guns not being used should always be unloaded. • Never climb a tree or fence or jump a ditch with a loaded gun. • Never shoot at a flat, hard surface or the surface ' of water. • Respect other people's property. r ��� 4 { City of Southlake,Texas CITY MANAGER MEMORANDUM August 31, 1994 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Bob Whitehead, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Resolution Authorizing Agreement With Tx-Dot for City to Assume Responsibility for Maintenance of Drainage Easement Texas Department of Transportation is requesting that the City of Southlake enter into a maintenance agreement for the drainage easement, which was enclosed across the comer of Southlake Market Place (F.M. 1709 and F.M. 1938). Tx-Dot policy requires such a maintenance agreement with the municipality prior to construction. How this slipped by Tx-Dot is unknown, however, it is standard procedure. Tx-Dot will not enter into an agreement with a private individual or company. City staff did inspect and approve the installation of the box culverts across Southlake Market Place. Staff does not anticipate any major maintenance associated with these structures. Therefore, staff would recommend that the City Council approve Resolution No. 94-43 and authorize the Mayor to enter into the Maintenance Agreement Between the State of Texas and the City of Southlake for the State's drainage facility left of station 13+65.54 on F.M. 1938. Please place this item on the September 6th council agenda. ��J-4 BW Attachments: Resolution Exhibit "A" Maintenance Agreement wpfiles\memos\txdot.cul RESOLUTION NO. 94-43 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH THE STATE OF TEXAS WHEREBY THE CITY WILL ASSUME RESPONSIBILITIES FOR DRAINAGE AND MAINTENANCE OF THE STATE'S DRAINAGE EASEMENT LEFT OF CENTERLINE STATION 13+65.54 ON FARM TO MARKET HIGHWAY 1938 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Southlake, Texas deems it necessary and to the best interest of the City of Southlake, Texas to enter into an agreement with the State of Texas, acting by and through the Texas Transportation Commission whereby the City will maintain proper drainage and maintenance within the State's drainage easement left of centerline station 13+65.54 on Farm to Market Highway 1938 in Southlake, Texas; as shown in the attached Exhibit A and made a part of this Resolution; BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS, that the City of Southlake, Texas, acting by and through its Mayor, enter into an agreement with the State of Texas whereby the City of Southlake, Texas assumes whatever responsibilities and liabilities the State may have for the proper and adequate discharge of all drainage from the highway drainage facility located at left of centerline station 13+65.54 on Farm to Market Highway 1938 in the City of Southlake, and Gary Fickes, Mayor of the City of Southlake, Texas be and is hereby authorized to enter into an agreement on behalf of the City of Southlake, Texas. The City Secretary is hereby instructed to attest and affix the seal of the City of Southlake, Texas to said agreement. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS THE DAY OF , 1994, at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Southlake, Texas. ATTEST: THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS City Secretary APPROVED: City Attorney Mayor City of Southlake, Texas City of Southlake, Texas LU zcY I _ z Q. o� W ,0 I W o .WN fio Wz z� Q � � O W >:00 � ��-� `may � /h�.z�� j � 0 � Q > Z�m � ' a m Cr Q ma om W W / w oc 3 OW . °` W to m $ a m ^� �� M ~c < zo o / z �' 10 h II N l d (DoN -� • J c > N Z O r N 11 c� I w 3 M OD N It- OD g�� M ° a i M D�N II 3 „ co Z1 V1 w g I I Alt: _ w Q z 11III vOD U O J a ~ xZ.. I I �a' O`a O Uwn: mZM W q 11 II -- °° w NO I o NI I I 3 Z ��Q� I m II�II o 8 Zin I� E� 2 II III oiM 8g N-• o z _ I JIJJIt 3 -0V) I > I � /'/ / v f�ONMNNN cn t0 C�O V N - `� N 11 11 11 2 �O -04 II Q o�►-_ju cn3� 4', N w cto 0 N l{� gg r' ' AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE STATE OF TEXAS AND THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE FOR THE STATE'S DRAINAGE FACILITY LEFT OF STATION 13+65.54 ON F.M. HIGHWAY 1938 STATE OF TEXAS § COUNTY OF TARRANT § This Agreement, made by and between the City of Southlake, Texas, hereinafter called CITY, and the State of Texas , acting herein by and through the Texas Transportation Commission, hereinafter called STATE: WHEREAS, the CITY passed a Resolution on 94-43 1994, authorizing its Mayor, on behalf of the City of Southlake, to enter into an agreement with the State of Texas whereby the CITY will assume whatever responsibilities and liabilities the STATE may have for the proper and adequate discharge of all drainage from the highway drainage facility located within the State's 0.264 Acre easement that is left of centerline survey station 13+65.54 on F.M. Highway 1938 in the City of Southlake, Texas as shown on Exhibit "A", attached hereto and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, the CITY accepts the drainage and maintenance responsibilities and liabilities of the STATE'S drainage facility located within the State's 0.264 Acre easement that is left of centerline survey station 13+65.54 on F.M. Highway 1938 in the City of Southlake, Texas as shown on Exhibit "A", attached hereto and made a part hereof: and WHEREAS, the CITY agrees to indemnify and hold the STATE harmless against loss or damages resulting from said CITY'S operations and maintenance of the STATE'S drainage facility located within the State's 0.264 Acre easement that is left of centerline survey station 13+65.54 on F.M. Highway 1938 in the City of Southlake, Texas, as shown on Exhibit "A", attached hereto and made a part hereof. 1 9w- NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the above premises, it is mutually agreed and r understood by the parties hereto that the CITY hereby assumes whatever responsibilities and liabilities the STATE may have for the proper and adequate discharge of all drainage from and through the State's drainage facility located within the State's 0.264 Acre easement that is left of centerline survey station 13+65.54 on F.M. Highway 1938 in the City of Southlake, Texas, as shown on Exhibit "A", attached hereto and made a part herof; and the CITY agrees to indemnify and hold the STATE harmless against loss or damages resulting from said CITY'S operation and maintenance of the STATE'S drainage facility located left of centerline survey station 13+65.54 on F.M. Highway 1938 in the City of Southlake, Texas, as shown on Exhibit "A", attached hereto and made a part herof. CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS In witness whereof, STATE has executed this instrument on this day of , 1994. BY: Mayor THE STATE OF TEXAS Certified as being executed for the purpose and effect of activating and/or carrying out the orders, established policies, or work APPROVED: programs heretofore approved and authorized by the Texas Transportation Commission under the authority of Minute Order Number 100002. City Attorney By: ATTEST: Gary W. Bernethy, P.E. (Seal) Director of Right of Way By: Date: Title: 2 9� W / z - J Z)LLJ oY z P � _ J ,� W . too m LLI LL.I z uo.o Om z , � O �t Q boo} z ,��, t �O� �V � Way. Q Pt � W •m W 0-0 � 1 t �O OL a a Z No—Woc� m �' of oD N egg) _ 0 ^' g ca WWm~ / a m 3 `� v W W co Qz0 o z 1-0 h II N ! � � p N ' N N z io, '� 1 co CD as N o� III . JQ > I > N PRO O ~ N - Z N CD N 1 W • M ~ Q lil t r CD 81, M _ N a �°�N III % I I - �� (7 W 1 O U — Z p H II N Y Q z II IIMo 0 o oar °J°0r�n W II II II OW m V z a a m J }- w Q II _ r11111 0 M (��OaJ £I 1 I OM $ No D Z�WaO II 2 II II I IT0 QOhMNN O CD 0 yQU(n Q J II n It 11 O ONE II Q DIZF-J •I �03U LL o w( OOWY + II J I//� QQO > f—Z{Z-JM Q Pod >-EE 0 U) 0 M-x w tl- /V v City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM CITY MANAGER ' September 2, 1994 Vq—2 TO: Curtis Hawk, City Manager FROM: Sandra L. LeGrand, City Secretary SUBJECT: Appointment to the Board of Adjustments. As directed by the City Council, I have attempted to contact former members of the City Council as possible applicants for the Board of Adjustments. As of this time I have not had very good luck. I have contacted or attempted to contact and left messages for the following: Betty Springer, Jim Wooll, Barry Emerson, Bruce McCombs, Loyd Eubanks, and Lloyd Latta. Lloyd Latta came in on Thursday and filled out an application. Prior to this time I talked with Sally Hall about the Board of Adjustments appointment and she expressed that she was not interested. I will continue to contact prospective applicants. I worded the Resolution for the appointment to replace Joe Bentley. If Council wishes to move alternate members up, I will adjust the resolution to fit the appointment. I attached applications that I have in the file. Please contact me if you have suggestions. . Ax4ttv sl q� - 1 City of Southlake,Texas ' RESOLUTION 'NO. 94-41 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS, APPOINT- ING A MEMBER TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City of Southlake has a Board of Adjustments as stated in the City Home Rule Charter, Chapter XI, Section 11.02; and, WHEREAS, the Zoning Ordinance No. 480, Section 44, calls for a five (5) member board with two (2) alternate members; and, WHEREAS, currently an unexpired term exists, which will expire in May, 1995. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS, THAT: Section 1. All the findings in the preamble are found to be true and correct and the City Council does hereby incorporate said findings into the body of this resolution as if copied in their entirety. Section 2. Under this Resolution, an appointment is hereby made to fill the unexpired term of Joe Bentley, with a term to expire in May, 1995. Section 3. This Resolution shall become effective after its passage and adoption by the City Council. PASSED AND APPROVED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 1994. CITY OF SOUTHLAKE BY: Gary Fickes, Mayor ATTEST: Sandra L. LeGrand City Secretary %mX9345\s1 City of Southlake, Texas RECEIVED ' APPLICATION FOR APPOIN'EM ENT TO J U L D 5 1994 SOUTHLAKE BOARDS AND COMMSSIONS CITY SECRETAR APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT TO: (Name of Board, Commission, or Committee) use a separate application for each appointment desired NAME: aalm ADDRESS: � HOME PHONE: -� �- 9j 3j/� YEARS IN CITY: 7 EMPLOYER:7he��'uden fic�/ �C ou /T1�I�'j � PHONE E: �{��"o2s�,j Current and/or previous board, commission, or committee experience in the City of Southlake: W14p Reasons for desiring to serve on this board, commission, or committee, and your opinion as to the purpose, goals, and duties of same: p ` T w wW 95 W e 1s/I114? Qualifications and experience that would assist you in serving in this position: - 12M In ,� `(? Do you understand and agree that your regular attendance and active support are required as an appointee and that noncompliance could result in removal from the board? V Additional information or comments? Please return this completed form to the City Secretary's Office. Each application will be kept on file for one (1) year. Signature: Date: OF If additional space is eded, attach to this application PAW ga,-3 City of Southlake,Texas APPLICATION FOR APPOIZV FMENT TO RECEIVED SOUTHLAKE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONSSEP I _ ;Na CITY SECRETARY APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT TO. (Name of Board, Commission, or Committee) Board of Adjustments use a separate application for each appointment desired NAME: Lloyd 0. Latta Jr. ADDRESS: 1580 Randol Mill Road HOME PHONE: 431-3197 YEARS IN"CITY: 26 years EMPLOYER: Retired PHONE: Current and/or previous board, commission, or committee experience in the City of Southlake: 10 Years City Council., Mayor, P&Z rity Mnnngpr,_ n»mProus boards and commissions Reasons for desiring to serve on this board, commission, or committee, and your opinion as to the purpose, goals, and duties of Same: rnmmnnity SPrvine Qualifications and experience that would assist you in serving in this position: see above Do you understand and agree that your regular attendance and active support are required as an appointee and that noncompliance could result in removal from the board? yes Additional information or comments? Please return this completed form to the City Secretary's Office. Each application will be kept on file for one (1) year. r' Signat Date: September 1, 1994 If add'tional ce is n eded, attach to this application City of Southlake,Texas RECEIVED APPLICATION FOR APPOEVTNIENT TO J U N 0 71994 SOUTHLAKE BOARDS AND COM MSSIONS CITY SECRETAR APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT TO: (Name of Board, Commission, or Committee) I 7 j C( Y� ✓� 0,V) use a sepa a application for a h appointment desired i �(� j NAME: _ 1r.�►'� ► � P _ L ADDRESS: 1 2 1 /-� �7 nq 00 Y"G 0-� HOME PHONE: '� �� cf 4) YEARS 'IN"CITY: EMPLOYER: Y) P, PHONE* Current and/or previous board, commission, or committee experience in the City of Southlake: I 1 Reasons for desiring to serve on this board, commission, or committee, and your opinion as o the p pos , goal and duties 0±1 same: �s 1� Qualifications and experience that would assist younrTing in t i positio U e r 'S , ►� . 1 o 47- l!44L43 e_ Do you understand and agree that your regular attendance and active support are required as an appointee and that noncompliance could result in removal from the board? moo S Additional information or comments? Please return this completed form to the City Secretary's Office. Each application will be kept on file for one (1) year. I Signatur &�L,//7p Date: 9 If additional space is needed, attach to this application ILW Clfy of Souchlake.Texas "PLICMW FOR Al'T�d To ,RLC���I, a �o�Rns Arm oMr �Iarr� u ry u 2 CITY SECRETARY APPLICATION FOR APPOYNTMENT TO: (Name of Board, Commission, or Committee) Planning and Zoning Commission ' use a separate application; for each appointment des red NAME: Richard F. Rick •.Dahlson ' ADDRESS: 1406 Wed ewood Court HOME PHONE: 817/424-1066 YEARS IN"CITY: 2 months EMPLOYER: Jackson & Walkers L.L.P._ PRONE: current and/or previous board, commission, or committee experience in the City of lout ekes none. Reasons for desiring to serve on this board, commission, or committee, and your opinion as to the purposle, goals, and duties of same: See attached Answer'1 �w Qualifications and experience that would assist you in serving i,n this position: See atta Do you understand and agree that your regular attendance and active support are required as an appointee and that noncompliance could result in removal from the board? Yes, and I am ready to Mgke the commitmen Additional information or comments? please return this completed form to the Cif r P Y Secre terry'a Office. Each applica. n will be kept on file for one (s) year. SighAtl3r % Date: June 2, L994 if additional space is needed, attach to this application I Attachment to Application , Answer 1 I had previously lived in East Dallas for seven years and, after an exhaustive fifteen month search, determined that Southlake was the most desirable place to live in the Metroplex. Why Southlake? (1) excellent schools; (2) small town (community) envi roau=t; (3) location; and(4)an opportunity to build the infrastructure for a prosperous, well planned city. Southlake, with its raw natural resources and beauty,is in an enviable position to build a city from scratch. Souddake is now facing the challenge of building a city by mixing commercial, residential and agricultural uses. A master plan needs to be developed and, more importantly, implemented. Traffic flow must be considered. The needs and wants of the community must be discussed. Only through active participation by the citizens of Southlake and the well informed and reasoned decisions of the members of the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council can the optimum plan be developed and implemented. I believe that the Planning and Zoning Commission must adopt a master development plan and, in so doing, listen, discuss, analyze and decide the zoning and planning needs of Southlake. I would like to be an active part of this. Answer 2 My business and legal education and experience has helped develop my skills to listen, ask questions, reason, rationalize and make decisions. I learn quickly and am decisive. I believe in the development of business (I serve on the Dallas Chamber of Commerce Small Business Executive Council), but also believe in the need to develop the residential sector of Southlake. I am married and have two young children and intend to live in Southlake for a long, long time. These factors point to the primary reasons why I should be appointed to the Planning and Zoning Commission: I am extremely interested in, and capable of, serving and I will be very committed to my responsibilities and duties. 95800 City of Southlake,Texas RECEIVED: APPLICATION FOR APPORSTMENT TO r E B 2 5 1994 SOUTHLAKE BOARDS AND COMMUSSIONS CITY SECRETAR APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT TO: (Name of Board, Commission, or Committee) usd a separatk application for each appointment desired I NAME: l!4 C P A— Cc /fA- ADDRESS: Tyy e%✓c' / ✓c_, / �ut�T/, /�� HOME PHONE: (S,Y/ 7) / d'g--IC 3 YEARS IN CITY: EMPLOYER: GTE PHONE: 6/ Current and/or previous board, commission, or committee experience in the City of Southlake: i Reasons for desiring to serve on this board, commission, or committee, and your opinion as to the purpose, goals, and duties of same: TG �Ct rf/C. /'4>e i n � I�/i. C f'rS o�` C ; Qualifications and experience that would assist you in serving in this position: X <✓��%( ✓p f� ���c�. �".�P .� ��ss u i Z--,11- 170 Do you understand and agree that your regular attendance and active support are required as an appointee and that noncompliance could result in removal from the board? y y Additional information or comments? ,P f,(- 7- Please return this completed form to the City Secretary's Office. Each application will be kept on file for one (1) year. signatur Date: /�S/��,• If additional space is needed, attach to this application q, -� j City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM September 2, 1994 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Karen P. Gandy,Zoning Administrator SUBJECT: ZA 94-93 Plat Revision/SouthRidge Lakes Phase VII REQUESTED ACTION: Plat Revision of Lots 3, 4, 5, 10, 11, 12,Block 5, SouthRidge Lakes Phase VII, and incorporating 0.50 acres of land situated in the A.A. Freeman Survey,Abstract No. 522,being revised to Block 5,Lots 3R, 4R, 5R, IOR, 11R, and 12R, SouthRidge Lakes Phase VII. LOCATION: South side of N. Peytonville Ave. approximately 400 feet West of Raven Bend Court OWNER/APPLICANT: Arvida/JMB Partners,L.P.-11 CURRENT ZONING: "SF-20A" Single-Family Residential District LAND USE CATEGORY: Medium Density Residential District NO. NOTICES SENT: None P&Z ACTION: August 18, 1994; Approved (6-0) ZA 94-93 Plat Revision subject to the Plat Review Summary dated August 12, 1994. STAFF COMMENTS: The Applicant has met all the review comments of the first Plat Review Summary dated August 12, 1994 with the exception of those items addressed in the attached second Plat Review Summary dated September 2, 1994. KPG/bls GAWPFIMEM0\CASES\94-93-PR.WPD �N- 1 Imp �r j Erg 7T117� to r� .I ■. �®� ©mot �■ " � �..� .r.�.NA rc _- ♦ .fir ♦� flit . ME �' - ' - - . ■Ilia rWN►�•,���,� City of Southlake,Texas PLAT REVIEW SUMMARY Case No: ZA 94-93 Review No:Tw-Q Date of Review: 09/02/94 Project Name: Plat Revision-Lots 3R.4R. 5R, IOR, I IR& 12R.Block 5. SouthRidge Lakes, Phase VII OWNER/APPLICANT: ENGINEER/SURVEYOR: Arvida/JMB Partners,L.P.-II J.E. Levitt Engineers, Inc. 1122 West McDermott 726 Commerce Street, Suite 104 Allen,TX 75002 Southlake,TX 76092 Phone: (214) 390-1190 Phone: (817)488-3313 Fax: Fax: (817)488-3315 CITY STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE ABOVE REFERENCED PROJECT RECEIVED BY THE CITY ON 08/29/94 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 TOM ELGIN AT(817)481-5581,EXT.753. 1. The title of the plat should be as follows: "Plat Revision,Lots 3R,4R, 5R, IOR, 11R& 12R,Block 5, SouthRidge Lakes,Phase VII; Being a revision of Lots 3,4, 5, 10, 11 & 12,Block 5, SouthRidge Lakes,Phase VII as recorded in Cabinet A,Slide 1786,PRTCT,and a acre tract of land in the A.A. Freeman Survey, Abstract No. 522 as recorded in Volume ,Page DRDCT; ... " 2. Provide standard approval block for plat revisions. 3. The following changes should be made with regard to existing easements: A. Show and label the drainage easement along the common line of Lots 4& 5, Block 3,Cross Timber Hills, Phase V. B. Show and label the 5'utility easement along the east and south lines of Lot 1, A.A. Freeman No. 522 Addition. C. Label the 10' utility easements on Lots 3R,4R, 5R, IOR, I IR& 12R,Block 5. 4. Provide legal description. 5. The subdivision boundary should not include any Peytonville R.O.W. previously dedicated by plat. The R.O.W.to be dedicated by this plat should be the corresponding portion of the unplatted tract that is being incorporated into the six lots. 6. Provide a N U.E. along the revised west line of Lots 3R,4R, 5R, IOR, 11R& 12R. 7. Label the front building setback line for Lots 3R & 4R, Block 5 (within the boundaries of this revision.) 8. Provide the deed restriction statement after the dedication paragraph and prior to the owner's signature (as per Appendix 5 of Subdivision Ordinance No. 480.) ,9H-3 City of Southlake,Texas 9. Delete the minimum finish floor note. * Although not required by ordinance,staff would appreciate placing "Case No.ZA 94-93"in the lower right corner for ease of reference. * All taxes due must be paid prior to filing this plat in the County records. * Original signatures and seals will be required on each blackline mylar 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. * Denotes Informational Comment cc: Arvida/JM 3 Partners,L.P.-II J.E. Levitt Engineers, Inc. �N— !I i!�fltl!��'�7 1;I' 'I III lllf{; 1tl.f f}I J iil�7 �• t!! #s 1.1• 'j 'f � I 9 'I%t'ii;illj}(}i i!I! [i �' rf ii i; 'i 1.E I�Ii ( 'llal�!lf3��IIi}I 1I;1 � �i. #f4t�(Ef : 1 • ` s�j��:i��!'�i�!�i4f�jjji� ,.il� ��!� �I !•e�1�'!�i t 1f � i•il 111 �.d NI'1�fi 4y1} ilf II f.i t' /l �i�'i I o P4 Avg 5 ���Wsff7 t; js � ep 84 oil g _ -_-•ram..:-� _ }�� ' •ye��;�' �� i .�� ' l .t 1 a J l }y' ilia i'ii.� rtiR"Y..f M�•p' ' • 1•y {i 9 ; (p� t i r tFo, rw. t City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM September 2, 1994 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Karen P. Gandy,Zoning Administrator SUBJECT: ZA 94-91 Specific Use Permit/Resolution No.9440 REQUESTED ACTION: Specific Use Permit for the sale of alcoholic beverages per Ordinance No. 480, Section 45.1 (1) and 45.6, on Lot 2, L.B.G. Hall No. 686 Addition LOCATION: 100 W. Southlake Blvd., Suite 160, Crossroads Square OWNER: PIMA Properties, Inc APPLICANT: Nuri Kabu d\b\a Armend's Italian CURRENT ZONING: "S-P-2" Site Plan District LAND USE CATEGORY: Mixed Use NO. NOTICES SENT: Nine (9) RESPONSES: One written response received inside the 200' notification area: * Robert and Suzane Harvey. 901 Emerald Blvd., opposed; alcoholic beverages should not be near residential area, this leads to more trash, vandalism and underage drinking. One written response received outside the 200' notification area: * Betty Springer. 1024 Mission Drive, in favor. P&Z ACTION: August 18, 1994; Approved(6-0)ZA 94-91 Specific Use Permit. STAFF COMMENTS: Attached please find the revised Concept Plan approved by City Council on November 19, 1991. On January 15, 1991, the City Council approved (4-0) Resolution 91-02 permitting the sale of beer only for off-premises consumption in a grocery store and drug store on Lot 2. KPG/bls G:\WPRMEMO\CASES\94-91SUP.WPD `5�' �- win MM �� '�� • r a � ' tr r w,R • oil J4 • ���� 111/►,��/ III�� � � Elm go"Mml ���■�//1�■/■ r► I, mois wppu "a MIN ■1 �, �� �Air IM In 03 NOW In •� r .LL N tcc < ) Q cn N m a) ¢ t� _ (p 1 F tt N Q m ~ _; m coO an I cc �. QV m �I m �^ Cr Q S I ¢< 'o S Q @1 � :zz Q cc = I <N N w , ^ ' .c" � �' n w c: '�, N = CA N a Qfl� cm rl in co•- ml cr LLLn 1709 Partners i m �V L ssr eer £oC CD' .. U N to.� Cl) Q o _ O m .. 1 + ' ca r'I a OTC U Z C7 O m� ti L o OZ ., ° liem I= m as g w I N z o L) a -N _ 'CV U fn o V J U O cc > V W a .�`cc U c U Q ¢ n UIomQ N m� ¢ N I Q Q E '' ui N U- US z.n �•��•— � mQ - N \ $ =3 cc \ v z<s �� m m Q 2 ¢tn •S� .r @1 mtn .w-.■�w �na.i. 'u.►Inoo s►.v.f.a�t •eocrnc+lto� � 'rw3•Mmw+rw,gw_�ww w-i-� . ►.w v.rr+.owr..•wn -- -'- ------.•—-- - -'-- � - � e ra:uvi wwsrri.u.n�,•e. w-:r. i w.wne..w.ors... � ; --«e_o.a w»•emw..w w=:.� i �1Atlst�lfr aauov oe•e -' :uan..w •._•._ i t�lA� tia.iriao oxxdaoxe e�� Et 8 . ^ --"----"-----. o�aiai "w�-. � '-'"•' '."•�------ f AfSt'LR aKYllOa aQvoKoaO![O 4 � �[ 6 � � C -_ -._ a•wv i:.r rev as.=�' lY mvqJ < Z t T d° € 03 ! , 6 3 � � -� -� I� IIil � ,�! �l1; � E� �• � s� gz: orb � � oId 67 Y 14 y rt y VY 3 Ii -1,Tr r —I' s 1 111��Z.w�L ---- 1 RESOLUTION NO.94-40 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS, GRANTING A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR THE SALE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES ON PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS, BEING LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOT 2, L.B.G. HALL NO. 686 ADDITION,AND MORE COMMONLY KNOWN AS 100 WEST SOUTHLAKE BLVD., SUITE 160,CROSSROADS SQUARE; AS DEPICTED ON THE APPROVED CONCEPT PLAN ATTACHED HERETO AND INCORPORATED HEREIN AS EXHIBIT "A"; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS,a Specific Use Permit for the sale of alcoholic beverages has been requested by a person or corporation having a proprietary interest in the property zoned "S-P-2" Site Plan District; and, WHEREAS,in accordance with the requirements of Section 45.1 (1) and 45.6 of the City's Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance,the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council have given the requisite notices by publication and otherwise, and have afforded a full and fair hearing to all property owners generally and to the persons interested and situated in the affected area and in the vicinity thereof, and, WHEREAS, the City Council does hereby find and determine that the granting of such specific use permit is in the best interest of the public health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS, THAT: SECTION 1 A Specific Use Permit is hereby granted for the sale of alcoholic beverages on the property legally described as Lot 2,L.B.G. Hall No. 686 Addition, and more commonly known as 100 West Southlake Blvd., Suite 160,Crossroads Square; as depicted on the approved Concept Plan attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit "A", subject to the provisions contained in the comprehensive zoning ordinance and the restrictions set forth herein. The following specific requirements and special conditions shall be applicable to the granting of this Specific Use Permit: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. OCs-5 Resolution No. 94-40 Page 2 SECTION 2 This resolution shall become effective on the date of approval of the City Council. PASSED AND APPROVED THIS THE DAY OF , 1994. CITY OF SOUTHLAKE By: Gary Fickes,Mayor ATTEST: Sandra L. LeGrand City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney City of Southlake,Texas G A W PF\RES-oRD\94-40.W PD \ is •n.rxczoo i..cv.ncvs •ocra<snowi ax EXHIBIT "A" , 4 ' ig ����'� � • � �' L ot�traoa aoroitaaouo 4 � �y �Y a o sF 01 6 ON MN w.r eivw�rw <c< f F .... - 1f %%-Poo (w r � am .,W ,.�,� t wA .i1M•�/M b � W ` �,�,_e1f1 SSJlll77 Resolution No. 94-40 Page 2 d City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM September 2, 1994 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Karen P. Gandy,Zoning Administrator SUBJECT: ZA 94-90 Plat Revision/Greenlee Business Park REQUESTED ACTION: Plat Revision of Lots 4 and 5,Block 1,Greenlee Business Park,Phase I, and Lots 6 and 7, Block 1, Greenlee Business Park, Phase H, and 9.177 acres of land out of the John A. Freeman Survey, Abstract No. 529, and being revised to Lots 4R and 8, Greenlee Business Park, Phase I. LOCATION: West side of S. Kimball Ave. approximately 475 feet North of East Continental Ave. OWNERS: E.L.F.M., Inc.,Chris Lagon and The Keller Bank APPLICANTS: Texas Baseball Center, David L. Thorne and Robert Walton, Agents CURRENT ZONING: "I-1" Light Industrial District LAND USE CATEGORY: Industrial NO. NOTICES SENT: Four(4) RESPONSES: One written response received within the 200' notification area: * Johnny and Edna Beech. 1000 S. Kimball Ave., in favor. One written response was received from outside the 200' notification area with the following signatures: * Jay and Mary Forbus. 595 S. Kimball, opposed; * C.S. and Marilyn Johnson, 505 S. Kimball, opposed; * Darrell and Donna Fagile. 505 S. Kimball, opposed; Their concerns are: narrow roads leading to the area, increased traffic in residential areas where children are playing,increased noise level at night, and they feel this request is not conducive to adjacent subdivisions. Three signed petitions were received at the August 18, 1994 Planning and Zoning Meeting. Petition#1,Eight signatures, opposed. Petition#2, Eighteen signatures, opposed. Petition#3, Eight signatures, opposed. Rl=� 1 City of Southlake,Texas P&Z ACTION: August 18, 1994; Approved (6-0) ZA 94-90 Plat Revision subject to the Plat Review summary dated August 12, 1994. STAFF COMMENTS: The Applicant has met all the review comments of the first Plat Review Summary dated August 12, 1994 with the exception of those items addressed in the attached second Plat Review Summary dated September 2, 1994. MH KPG/bls GAWPF\MEM0\CASES\94-90-PR.W PD G � • Itw � I f A/ A10 t.f K 8.0 K VC II NCI /t11 tM tM1 �` IN It t K ' I A KI.at K I f to r ��p- To .f.M.[ 1•' I IN6a I I g I A t A ttait m r M ft1 .N/Oct I I 1 •K l.J 1 �J g I SUB a MS s.n K al I t K �J twK\t a [.t[K 1 ww M N.N K 1 a MI[t• I 0 eo 1 l.tw K tw.t cccy=- M 0014 I tt.w K A tt f M- _ K 11K ( 9.6 K I I \IIK\ ISSN. \w t! t S S I 1 1 d..w M N.lt M N.w1 M Nt0 _,gyp 1 M tw M Nw1 .o K N OE��e ■ I - •K• .ti K tw NIK MI[T S M tfK A to _.S K .N K A s.0 M Itat( A awlM \w LI M IIIK �^ M lot..h .ts K to K I M NN M K M NIS \w NIS ! \w NwI Mvo a •�K .K ..ff .K• _ .0 M N. M NK "t•wit tw aw .A K TO N.t M NN ,tf. ,K K tw NII M NN t K \w lat .. .tf K •K K M NII Iw>. �K I2.42 K M lta M atC M tla. .t ..f K .N K ..f K \w�K t .. M lwt+ Matt; A tc M IM I ..[K .tt K .b K t K M N. I M t`w..0 •o.f f h A K tw Iwwt WoS.K I w aw«a A Na[ Iw NN tw ItK I �\ M Nw.t M Nat M Nt tw I ♦`� K •N K ..K NK tw tttt I S[• I M N•t \!IS• S K w.IK tw .'•�- w Nt. a.Mt• I t..1 K �• TRACT MAP SF- 3 Li V! tSw 1 n •.a K Ta fo � - G .a. t K K 1 1 a K Tw a•. at t K t.tt K 1 Tw W To aua 1 aT' ,K N ,• ,� TA aK .fM K �.(� ! �a• o' 1 rt ar VG . III_ 11 A 1 It It, a.f n, tom , .ail K �1 1 GREEN � '/ 11 !1 I MESUB as fa, •'�� tK tat AS. "SF-20A" ?c1 �62Z° • m TwKT t fitSouthlake JV ma Ta OF E` J- °SF-20A" t 41.7 G20,1YL° a � 1 G• StJap13 �jN. Lemons 0 U to EAooN SUB tl.o K iw« =w q o{K {K $ ` EN E °E7 1 G �622 I = !!IL I II 1 Memo � '` I t TMR= Industrial o. N wIQ) cc Planning —(1) 0. 1 1 o : a to K�1 tw�.O iw aatao P Tw pu Tw taK 'at K N a78 t a .K a •K K tw ta.at: 1%t4K iw to.S1 ..f K ®�`t: Twal:T S Tw to.o/ to N.{. ••. TO tar A N.wla ..S K ..S K .K K .K a Tw tog" to aataC tw tata R NK ,a Naal • 'K .a K ".a K .K a To tat, Iw to.% to toil to ttaa}/ •-S K ..K .K a ,K a To tat,a M tat. To toa fw NK •�K .a K .K a .K K fa NSo tw a to Tw NaT •� .K Ta N.r. •K• .K K TN to-t U Ta 444.1 tw ta) u .K ..a a .K K w tot4 T t.S a i To lawt N ttl Nla •• •• 1 K ���' ADJACENT OWNERS of aC .ia K Tao K 'to X. To to— Tw tall tw.a.. K; ;K AND ZONING Ta to.wt !r.Nlaa .aaa w lln t..a1 Kr City of Southlake,Texas PLAT REVIEW SUMMARY Case No: _ZA 94-90 Review No: Two Date of Review: 09/02/94 Project Name: Plat Revision - Lots 4R. 7R& 8. Block 1. Greenlee Business Park. Phase I OWNER/APPLICANT: ENGINEER/SURVEYOR: Texas School of Baseball, Inc. Ward Surveying Company P.O. Box 820253 Fort Worth,Texas 76182-0253 PHONE: (817)281-5411 FAX: (817) 838-7093 CITY STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE ABOVE REFERENCED PROJECT RECEIVED BY THE CITY ON 08/22/94 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 TOM ELGIN AT(817)481-5581,EXT.753. 1. Provide missing deed record for the Keller Bank property. 2. Confirm that the ELFM deed V.9885,Pg. 826 includes Lots 6 and 7,Block 1. If not,include the deed ownership for Lots 6 and 7. 3. Provide separate dedication paragraphs for each of the record owners. Provide deed restriction statements at the end of each of the dedication paragraphs prior to the owners signatures. 4. Label the bearing of the last call on the graphic. 5. For clarification,please label the T width portion of the R.O.W. dedication as "R.O.W. dedication." 6. The 15'U.E. along the north line of Lot 7R should be located entirely within Lot 7R or Lot 8,or offset 5' and 10'. * All taxes due must be paid prior to filing this plat in the County records. * Original signatures and seals will be required on each blackline mylar 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. * Denotes Informational Comment cc: Chris Lamon, 1103 E. Pine, Ste. 102, Keller TX 76107 ELFM,Inc., 1300 Shady Oaks Lane,Ft.Worth TX 76107 The Keller Bank, P.O. Box 483, Keller TX 76248 Ward Surveying Company Oy Z. .0: ti jJ21 ih SO Od'516-OM i41 NOISIAIORnS S*0017ff go AV 11yovi IN Hinos —.7W. cr C4L U, ow 0 Z in K a 0 0>R 1> W --------------------------------------------- a.. .1 eL U ,0 0 z w 'o S, 0 0 9 E w 00,e ad W96 7" L1 Yd V*E*7m m is imor JNV7.(nOf 0 z Vt r 7A to Z V) z 4 X 0 x ILI NW EE z --------------------- E] Ld Li z Z t:I.- o z o City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM September 2 1994 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Karen P. Gandy,Zoning Administrator SUBJECT: ZA 94-89 Specific Use Permit/Resolution No.94-39 REQUESTED ACTION: Specific Use Permit for the development of an indoor baseball facility and outdoor fields for instruction and entertainment per Ordinance No. 480,Section 45.1 #11 on 12.678 acres,being Lots 4 and 5 of Greenlee Business Park, Phase I, and Lot 6, Greenlee Business Park, Phase Il, and approximately 1.72 acres out of the J.A.Freeman Survey,Abstract No. 529,being a portion of Tract 6. Two variances have been requested with this application: The Applicant would like to place masonry and/or glass product on the North side of the building (their entrance), rather than on the East side of the building which is approximately 490' from South Kimball Ave. They also request that the landscape material required on the South border be placed along the South Kimball Avenue frontage and the North landscape material be used in the Northwest corner. LOCATION: West side of S. Kimball Ave. approximately 475 feet North of East Continental Ave. OWNERS: E.L.F.M. Inc., Chris Lamon and The Keller Bank APPLICANTS: Texas Baseball Center, David L. Thorne and Robert Walton, Agents CURRENT ZONING: "I-1" Light Industrial District LAND USE CATEGORY: Industrial NO. NOTICES SENT: Nine (9) RESPONSES: Four written responses received within the 200' notification area: * James F. Lunsford. P.O. Box 1685. Dallas, in favor; applicant and owners have made substantial changes to satisfy adjacent property owners. This development will increase the tax base and be a plus to Southlake. SL- ' City of Southlake,Texas * E-systems Inc. Pool Trust. W.B. Strange III. Counsel, in favor;this is a good use for this area of Southlake. * Arlon C. Washburn. 2060 E. Continental. Applied Therapeutic Sciences, in favor. * Johnny L. &Edna E. Beech. Beech's Overhead Door. Inc.. 1000 S. Kimball Ave., in favor. One written response was received from outside the 200' notification area with the following signatures: * Jemmy and Mary Forbus. 595 S. Kimball, opposed; * C.S. and Marilyn Johnson. 505 S. Kimball, opposed; * Darrell and Donna Fagile. 505 S. Kimball,opposed; Their concerns are: narrow roads leading to the area, increased traffic in residential areas where children are playing,increased noise level at night, and they feel this request is not conducive to adjacent subdivisions. Three signed petitions were received at the August 18, 1994 Planning and Zoning Meeting. Petition#l,Eight signatures, opposed. Petition#2, Eighteen signatures, opposed. Petition#3, Eight signatures, opposed. P&Z ACTION: August 18, 1994; Approved (4-2) ZA 94-89 Specific Use Permit subject to the Plan Review Summary dated August 12, 1994 and with the following stipulations; the parking quantity to be determined by Staff according to what they learn about the use;the lights be aimed as per the Lighting Plan;there be no P.A. system; "I-1" noise regulations be abided; no stands; no sale or use of alcohol; the age limit be nineteen or younger; hours of operation are such that no full inning may begin past 10:00 p.m.; no camping; forgive masonry requirement frontage on Kimball Ave.; and it is P&Z's recommendation not to waive bufferyard requirements. STAFF COMMENTS: The Applicant has met all the review comments of the first Plan Review Summary dated August 12, 1994 with the exception of those items addressed in the attached second Plan Review Summary dated September 2, 1994. M KPG/bls GAWPF\MEM0\CASES\94-89SUP.WPD �C--a NUNN w Oer; To LIM L:m•f..IFS.fir„ ■ r. �, 1 ` ■r LM L 9-Tv Uin all Ir l'� i I_►�i�.� .�`: r• � It �c c N IH I I f 7.3 K t]w ! • M 7 •.6.0 M 10 z.to K ISM ta-w t)•w1 is 1 >< TO >e to K M Yl 11 =K S.17 ec I to C ! M aw .aN ec To e. E �Zg58 , To \•. A 7te•. I T I-, Tot ewf t TO7 •i"t1004 �.J I EEN =r «---- -- CJ � GEA00" g 11'_ 11 I M SU9 M 367 a.c To it SF_LOA to s < I 2Q s.n ec 11 11 a.Tot .c 1wKi 1 Southlake JV a M > fw.cT I ELMF Corp. CIS TO, Efk) _ ` Y c:"0Ustrj1SF-2O11 G- N�pcy 5,1013 N. Lemons ''° ' r0 I � L.� U I Sue Ef1...0 Mac M K H I Ow .. !K 7 c EN E µFAO .c . u E ' Ga ►g2z° il'�� 1� Memo� '+ c _TaKf Industrial CL N w "'°" Planning Q I o Q tH,w a.�o M so"' 7w 1•aw A Sam Ii is Io.J M ta.w •67 c .a• •a.0 to tatoc M toK M fo.Il .H K ® � Ta.cT] M lelef iw.ate. Me.w._. TO laM ta. .H K S K .a K ."a M n/oc TO IeIK M Set. M Na iw to" •H K .H.c IS K .a/ To iota - TO Ieli is N.Y Toto.- •H.c ..c .a a .a a - TO Satz. To tot. I TO so. to I" ..S.[ ...c K iw lose to to TO to., M Na1 •H/ ..e 1 .a a .a c TO.017 M N.] To 211e.3 V ...0 ..e o u .K c rw tea I Y t.s 1 TO Rle to to N A N4. -• •� r I .aK 8 aKTO M to to-( I .a.[7a t•..a to tett. ADJACENT OWNERS .a .H K la s2 Tw l ar A Sews K: M toll:.3K _ AND ZONING w tlrt M lew.e •K fw I. M tort M IIw.1 t.1.9 / O 71.e1 K fw Sew TOT w.y rw 119C .• C �� �•� / 1 `O City of Southlake,Texas CONCEPT PLAN REVIEW SUMMARY CASE NO: ZA 94-89 REVIEW NO: TWO DATE OF REVIEW: 09/02/94 PROJECT NAME: Concept Plan for Specific Use Permit for Outdoor Entertainment Center. being 12.678 A., being the proposed Lot 4R. Block 1. Greenlee Business Park Phase 1 OWNERS: APPLICANTS: E.L.F.M., Inc. Chris Lamon Keller State Bank Texas Baseball Center 1300 Shady Oaks Lane 1103 E. Price.Su.102 P.O Box 483 7503 Tillman Hill Road Fort Worth, Texas 76107 Keller, TX. 76244 Keller, TX 76248 Colleyville, Texas 76034 PHONE: PHONE: (817) 498-7475 FAX: FAX: CITY STAFF HAS RECEIVED THE ABOVE REFERENCED PLANS RECEIVED BY THE CITY ON 08/22/94 AND WE OFFER THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR NEED FURTHER CLARIFICATION, PLEASE CONTACT KAREN GANDY AT (817)481-5581, EXT. 743. 1. Remove "Note 1" from the plan if it is the applicant's intent to request a variance to the Masonry Ordinance to place masonry only on the North side of the proposed building. * The Masonry Ordinance No. 557 requires that "all buildings constructed on property zoned I-1 . . . shall be constructed of masonry materials, wood, glass, or decorative metal (non-galvanized finish); provided, however, any exterior wall fronting on any street shall be constructed of masonry materials or glass, covering at least eighty percent (80%) of said wall, exclusive of all doors." * Although adequacy of the parking will be determined upon submittal of the site plan. The parking section of the zoning ordinance provides the following: 1 space per 100 s.f. of floor area for a commercial amusement establishment or 1 space for each 3 bench seating space for stadium or gymnasium use. Based on further study, Staff feels that 1 parking space per 3,000 s.f. of playing field area, plus 1 parking space per student and 1 parking space for each instructor in the 18,000 s.f. instruction area plus 1 space per 200 s.f. of office/retail area would be appropriate. These calculations would result in the following: * southwestern field (51,000 s.f.) = 17 spaces * southeastern field (70,000 s.f.) = 24 spaces * field adj. to office (115,500 s.f.) = 39 spaces * instruction area (6 stations x 4 students plus 1 instructor) = 30 spaces * office/retail area (single story) (2,000 s.f.) = 10 spaces Total required parking: 120 spaces City of Southlake,Texas During discussions at the Planning and Zoning Commission, the applicant proposed to build the facility in phases. Phase 1 was to include the teaching facility/office and the southwestern field plus 60 parking spaces. Phase 2 was to include the southeastern field and an additional 20 parking spaces. Phase 3 was to include the filed adjacent to the office facility plus an additional 20 parking spaces. In total, 100 parking spaces are proposed. * The applicant should be aware that prior to issuance of a building permit, a site plan, landscape plan, and irrigation plan along with the building plans must be submitted for approval and all required fees must be paid. This may include but not be limited to the following fees: Park Fee, Perimeter Street Fee, Water & Sewer Impact and Tap Fees, and related Permit Fees. * The applicant should be aware that based on the size building indicated on this submittal the following interior landscaping shall be required prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. REQUIRED INTERIOR LANDSCAPE Canopy Accent Ground Trees Trees Shrubs Cover Area req'd = 2.000 s.f.* 3 7 33 - 200 s.f. * Of this total, 10 s.f. per parking stall is required in the parking areas and 75% of the required plantings must be in the front and along the sides of the building between the building and the interior edge of the required bufferyards. * Denotes Informational Comment cc: E.L.F.M., Inc. Chris Lamon Keller State Bank �E _ Texas Baseball Center Goodwin and Marshall, 6001 Bridge St., Suite 100, Fort Worth, TX. 76112 a � oas � e4 a a 40 • tt�trrltrts►trrsrtt►krM p a 1 F I Rs t w a •11• 'jgj I I O 1 1 m$G —— �LdBV!4N11 9 QrL03 � _ M w •� � �� ( F 1 Npir B � �� O `` ' p I •Q� u3 w 'L p w99 wr�� r o O 3 r t � all �w� 1 7��,►�i � t �k�PL Z � �` I � I �F•F R>i b f Iw 1 �^� I j , , :•:ao y 3Ntl 4�am y w a —�— � —N.00JD0.06N f fff I ~�rqr ® � I •���a I �� �' 9��i°� I �' �4�a ��� 16 . O H W Z ,(L m J = Y ab Z ~ tc Q � c��tU ww ONII A111340tid 9UISNI 13 9)30N3d NNII NIVHJ 14 9 U. U. —33N3d BOOM.Lj SZ . m M I t� w' m o Z a- g ar VC _ , r Z. 2. y0 0d 0 —� c. 315 FT. �tij� w w w a' 5 RRR CT T Lit N LU \ U. `•� d z www 1 3 � .o 0.001 uwv+� ri w ooa vlew� aEL dOHs oad � M W ro a j a® p � 0.a2 cn 0 p m r 33N3d Nt411 t4lyHo 13 S n w O Q m U 4 u ONVl6 ® ti 30N33-1M'1 MdH013 9 Noiss2 Noo z w 0 ® a u ui o 1 � �® WPM Y w u, t� zw Wma w � J 'O ao5ab°o ^� q T tor V N �-- —3ON3d BOOM ld Sl— • — (3NII A183dQUd 34ISNI 9)30N33 NNII NIVHO 14 9— 2�_g RESOLUTION NO, 94-39 ,,. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS, GRANTING A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF AN INDOOR BASEBALL FACILITY AND OUTDOOR FIELDS FOR INSTRUCTION AND ENTERTAINMENT USES ON PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS, BEING LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOTS 4 AND 5 OF GREENLEE BUSINESS PARK, PHASE I, AND LOT 6, GREENLEE BUSINESS PARK, PHASE II, AND APPROXIMATELY 1.72 ACRES OUT OF THE JOHN A. FREEMAN SURVEY,ABSTRACT NO. 529,BEING A PORTION OF TRACT 6; AS DEPICTED ON THE APPROVED CONCEPT PLAN ATTACHED HERETO AND INCORPORATED HEREIN AS EXHIBIT "A"; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS,a Specific Use Permit for instruction and entertainment uses has been requested by a person or corporation having a proprietary interest in the property zoned as "I-1"Light Industrial District; and, WHEREAS, in accordance with the requirements of Section 45.1 (11) of the City's Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance,the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council have given the requisite notices by publication and otherwise, and have afforded the persons interested and situated in the affected area and in the vicinity thereof; and, WHEREAS, the City Council does hereby find and determine that the granting of such Specific Use Permit is in the best interest of the public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS, THAT: SECTION 1 A Specific Use Permit is hereby granted for the development of an indoor baseball facility and outdoor fields for instruction and entertainment uses on the property legally described as Lots 4 and 5 of Greenlee Business Park, Phase I, and Lot 6, Greenlee Business Park, Phase II, and approximately 1.72 acres out of the John A. Freeman Survey, Abstract No. 529, being a portion of Tract 6;as depicted on the approved Concept Plan attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit "A", subject to the provisions contained in the comprehensive zoning ordinance and the restrictions set forth herein. The following specific requirements and special conditions shall be applicable to the granting of this Specific Use Permit: 1. 2. Resolution No. 94-39 Page 2 3. 4. 5. SECTION 2 This resolution shall become effective on the date of approval by the City Council. PASSED AND APPROVED THIS THE DAY OF , 1994. CITY OF SOUTHLAKE By: Gary Fickes, Mayor ATTEST: Sandra L. LeGrand City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney City of Southlake,Texas G\W PF\RES-ORDk94-39.W PD - IO EXHIBIT "A" ON wr as o h O ss �z R �; R+ 8 4,b,.lrbYkbbf66bb4bC kbkbll .........o=r.:r.u.pwp I I F RKAIN .f jpv��j I I =O4 lx C�� I V g k �3 IF j3 `� I M� w G~ z� irti Al 1 bir— Xo < ?lx wVoV W I r mo o o t, C IN r 3 r� v c ° I i •do N g I J bw� M ppAS ® Q 1 I 0...qo — 1 lYl —� -- —4.004046N f f4! Vit ® di I k, Resolution No. 94-39 �_ �( Page 3 City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM September 2, 1994 TO: Planning and Zoning Commissioners FROM: Karen P. Gandy,Zoning Administrator SUBJECT: ZA 94-88 Rezoning and Development Plan/Coventry/Ordinance No.480-144 REQUESTED ACTION: Rezoning and Development Plan for Coventry, being a 103.76 acre tract of land situated in the T.M. Hood Survey, Abstract 706, being Tracts 1 & 1C, IA, 1B, 3A, 3C, 11B, and Lots 1 & 2, Bradley Addition. The development proposes 127 lots, 2,700 sq. ft. homes, 1.23 du/ac., and average lot size of 24,500 sq. ft. LOCATION: West of Shady Oaks Dr., North of W. Southlake Blvd., on the East side of N. Peytonville, approximately 1/2 mile South of W. Dove St. OWNERS: Helen Taylor and Harry J. Bradley APPLICANT: PIMA Properties, Inc. CURRENT ZONING: "AG" Agricultural REQUESTED ZONING: "R-P.U.D." Residential Planned Unit Development LAND USE CATEGORY: Low Density Residential NO. NOTICES SENT: Thirty-five (35) RESPONSES: Nine written responses received within the 200' notification area: * L. Bolton. 1200 Cypress Creek Ct.,opposed; wants to keep one acre lots. * Pete W. Smith. 596 Garden Ct., opposed; developments should be restricted to one acre lots in accordance to Land Use Plan. * Bob L. Ramsey, 1650 N. Shady Oaks, opposed; concerned about drainage, and lot sizes do not conform to surrounding one acre lots. * J.L. Clow. 820 N. Shady Oaks Dr., in favor; this is a logical use of the land at this time. * Fernando A. Casas. 1201 Plantation Dr., opposed; appreciates the changes that were made in this proposal but is still to this development. Concerns are increased traffic, drainage, and less than one acre lots. sb- � City of Southlake,Texas * Glen. Alice and Norman Burgess. 1253 N. Peytonville, opposed; small lots are not consistent with surrounding one acre lots, there will be increased traffic, explosive growth to school system resulting in higher taxes, and more water run off. * Don J. Weeks. 1325 N.Peytonville Ave.,opposed;increased amount of concrete will create larger drainage problems, narrow roads will not handle increased traffic, existing schools can't handle more students, and larger cities bring more crime. * K.L. Sumner. 1205 N. Peytonville, opposed; prefers "SF-1" to comply with the Land Use Plan. * Everett and Mary Allen. 1201 Cypress Creek Circle, opposed; they do not want high density homes,they want one acre lots, and drainage problems will increase. Ten written responses received from outside the 200'notification area: * Paul and Lee Fahrenbrook. 1865 North Peytonville Rd., opposed; their concerns are: 20,000 sq. ft. lot size is unacceptable, safety of children in the neighborhood,reduced property values,-will overburden the current streets, and will destroy the low density environment of Southlake. * Robin Jones. 510 Ravenaux. SPIN #11 Representative, opposed; concerns are: loss of trees, traffic congestion, large construction vehicles in area, and approval of this request will destroy the rural setting. * John E. Janbaz. 1302 Plantation Dr., opposed; density of housing is too high, does not comply with the Land Use Plan, rural atmosphere and excellent school system are being threatened. * Harold Knight. 1749 E. Highland, in favor; developer will provide main sewer trunk line to the Northwest quadrant of the City thus alleviating the citizens of Southlake having to pay to provide sewer in this area. *Mike Robertson. 1212 Cross Timber, opposed; lots should be a minimum of one acre or not be developed so that surrounding properties will not be affected. * Joseph M. Reilly. 1275 Shady Oaks Drive, opposed; existing grade of roads and sewer facilities are consistent with low density development-not medium density,increased traffic will cause a safety concern at street intersections, the proposed sewer is not consistent with the existing city plan, drainage problems will increase. * Gay and Julie Stakes. 1281 Post Oak Trail, opposed; one acre lots should be provided for, sewer should be connected at the time the developer starts to sell lots, traffic studies and road improvements should be done to alleviate traffic problems, ample set backs of major through roads and plantings of trees as a buffer to maintain a rural feeling should be provided. * Donnie Darr. 1241 Post Oak Trail,opposed;concerned are: the high density, surrounding properties are one acre, storm-water run off, increased traffic, heavy construction traffic, deed restrictions of Coventry will not be adhered to. $b -4 City of Southlake,Texas * R.J. Maness. 420 Ravenaux Dr., opposed; concerns are drainage issues,safety of residents and children walking to and from school,and increased traffic. * Richard Crowe. 1502 Plantation,requested additional information on this item. P&Z ACTION: August 18, 1994; Approved (3-2-1) ZA 94-88 Rezoning and Development Plan for Coventry subject to the Plan Review Summary dated August 12, 1994 deleting item#S recommendation that the East- West street intersecting N. Peytonville Ave. be aligned with Post Oak Trail, and recommending item#14.c. to Council-60'R.O.W. (2 lanes) on the road connecting Shady Oaks Drive to N. Peytonville Ave. STAFF COMMENTS: The Applicant has met all the review comments of the first Plan Review Summary dated August 12, 1994 with the exception of those items addressed in the attached second Plan Review Summary dated September 2, 1994. Oy KPG/bls GAWPF\M EMO\CASES\94-88-ZD.WPD �p-3 • li`rr �1;. � mi®m ■�IIlIr�`/�. � ' !►%' p lkmJ ins u!.- i .;�i7��7�� ems' ■ rrw�.�� �1� 1�� �����. ., ::•. ��: •� � � I ���� � ��� i��%����►1 tam Nil all ■■a�� . mot■� �'����w�r�� NIi J y�,� \ 12 1 I.aO a y1 a ° c I K I 1 - "SF-IA" w t•r •S I I.c .... AC = r_C " " 1 I w"e2 wttl TSURVEYY AAOEN , 5o2,oN I A-72 L I 1 Iw 23� 1 1.IWca f•K \ L.Cead•w I is K _-.AD. I L. Rraar ]\ L Lcwrs� I o 3 Sf at K 3 _` • A --- 1. RLaw � •�:\� 1 _ •JaF-lA• ( r .. ' 92 s r*s�.c L �lQQ� f I I . -AG. - 1t ..K L. Crar 1! M r.$?.0 Iw r .93 K G J. LLIIL s f.x K L. I •SF-lA• ... 1 Iw rE ] (A5 1 J. SO 'Ac•1 LN K i I 3 J. 1.11... « •11.Race►ar I _ .AG. c I i .-cf N � I.Jc .1 K U M. Allen I •AG" - lw • C.YLL1Lmb- tw xr I I IwK1 N -- O J. wryer 1 S+C C. fcwarc 1-L�jG 1 1 Iw KI O J'r_—iL i .wK.. .33e J. Glover 1 s3.yLwc ' oo�- I •AC' _ •AG• -re, 2P 70�E6 I rw a 3 a.ss K . ss. 3 M. Ro..,cc 59 r ' a tw, u x I "AG" 0 2az• -r g A I c t GAE I Iw.x1 AG" 1 L " o w.•II / i R. Jew.. •SF-lA" � rw.x2 [. Suwwar "AC• cl r.I r Y. R.11 6 _ J. Mc C.31r t : 1.'Icc D I .f c sI.cEINa.... Y w pCw t. - I � I •f'a.1.31 w pCw I.2.cl I.e K I \ « i I J. Clev M. x.mr; A.ccwc «0 3 1 tt Ic_r Iw IIE I O•I I.]K 1 I i N 42 1 1 aa.c '1 ADJACENT OWNERS - - - ,, AND ZONING Q-5 i City of Southlake,Texas DEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW SUMMARY CASE NO: ZA 94-88 REVIEW NO: TWO DATE OF REVIEW: 09/02/94 PROJECT NAME: Development Plan for Coventry (formerly OakRidge), being 103.76 acres situated in the T.M. Hood Survgy, Abstract No. 706, Tracts 1 and 1C, 1A, 1B. 3A, 3C, and Lots 1 and 2, Bradley Addition OWNER/APPLICANT: ENGINEER/PLANNER/ARCHITECT: Pima Properties. Inc. J. E. Levitt Engineers, Inc. 5215 N. O'Connor, Suite 200 726 Commerce Street, Suite 104 Irving, Texas 75035 Southlake, Texas 76092 Phone:(214) 444-8322 Phone: (817) 481-3313 Fax: (214) 869-4550 Fax: (817) 481-3315 CITY STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE ABOVE REFERENCED PLANS RECEIVED BY THE CITY ON 08/29/94 AND WE OFFER THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR NEED FURTHER CLARIFICATION, PLEASE CONTACT KAREN GANDY AT (817)481-5581, EXT. 743. --------------- DEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW: 1. The Subdivision Ordinance (5.03-K-1) requires street stubs at 1,000' intervals. This would require that a stub be provided to the South through the J.L. Clow property. 2. Although the offset is greater than the 125' required by ordinance (approx. 300' shown), Staff recommends that the East-West street intersecting North Peytonville Avenue be aligned with Post Oak Trail to create a safer intersection along North Peytonville Avenue. 3. Show the front building lines for all lots. 4. Show any proposed walls, fencing, or screening devices (i.e. berms) and label the type and height. 5. Show or note the proposed sidewalks mentioned in the development narrative. 6. The Thoroughfare Plan indicates an extension of West Highland Avenue to the West as a 70' arterial along the southern boundary of this property. Some alternatives to this issue are as follows: a. Delete requirement and approve as submitted. May need to widen R.O.W. at Shady Oaks to accommodate turn lanes. b. Require 70' R.O.W. (4 lanes) on the road connecting Shady Oaks Drive to North Peytonville Avenue. c. Require 60' R.O.W. (2 lanes) on the road connecting Shady Oaks Drive to North Peytonville Avenue. 7. Remove all references to "50' R.O.W., 31' B/B, and 29' B/B" shown on the plan. CO -(* City of Southlake,Texas DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS REVIEW: 8. Insure that all references to acreage, densities, etc. are consistent between the plan and the narrative. 9. On Page 4, item 4, correct the square footage to read: "two thousand seven hundred." * The Engineering Staff will review the engineering analyses of roadways, drainage, water distribution system, sewerage collection system described on Pages 5 and 6. * Staff will coordinate street name approvals with the fire department staff prior to final plat submittal. * The applicant should be aware that any revisions made prior to City Council must be received at the City by September 12. 1994. All revised submittals should be folded 6" x 9" and include an 11" x 17" reduction. Please provide revised Development Regulations also. * Denotes Informational Comment - cc: Pima Properties, Inc. John Levitt Engineers Inc. Harry J. Bradley, 1645 N. Peytonville Ave., Southlake, 76092 Helen Taylor, 1200 Shady Oaks, Southlake, 76092 9SI)-I ij 15 I it i fit if 1A li` Z W gj it it, i if I if h I P [is ijl if I IS 2 i w-q jil! ;i 11 Ii Ii ii fit it if;if i hi i ii,h N il HI I I r. is ,is o as s 17 it ---Lk is da Id i 9,21 T_ TF it's I i d S.0"N OOD-V CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS ORDINANCE NO. 480-144 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 BEINAND MORE FULLY AND COMPLETELY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT "A" FROM TO . 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 WHEREAS,the hereinafter described property is currently zoned as Aultual 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 GAORMZONING\480.144 Page I 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 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: GAORDVONING\480.144 Page 2 cbp -►p Being acre tract of land situated in the r Wand more fully and completely described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herem from p a tt to y" x Section 2. That the City Manager is hereby directed to correct the Official Zoning map of the City of Southlake,Texas,to reflect the herein changes in zoning. Section 3. That in all other respects the use of the tract or tracts of land herein above described shall be subject to all the applicable regulations contained in said Zoning Ordinance and all other applicable and pertinent ordinances for the City of Southlake,Texas. All existing sections, subsections,paragraphs, sentences,words,phrases and definitions of said Zoning Ordinance are not amended hereby,but remain intact and are hereby ratified, verified,and affirmed. Section 4. That the zoning regulations and districts as herein established have been made in accordance with the comprehensive plan for the purpose of promoting the health, safety, morals and the general welfare of the community. They have been designed, with respect to both present conditions and the conditions reasonably anticipated to exist in the foreseeable future; to lessen congestion in the streets; to provide adequate light and air;to prevent over-crowding of land; to avoid undue concentration of population;and to facilitate the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewerage, drainage and surface water, parks and other commercial needs and development of the community. They have been made after a full and complete hearing with reasonable consideration among other things of the character of the district and its peculiar suitability for the particular uses and with a view of conserving the value of buildings and encouraging the most appropriate use of land throughout the community. Section 5. That this ordinance shall be cumulative of all other ordinances of the City of Southlake, Texas, affecting zoning and shall not repeal any of the provisions of said ordinances except in those instances where provisions of those ordinances are. in direct conflict with the provisions of this ordinance. Section 6. That the terms and provisions of this ordinance shall be deemed to be severable and that if the validity of the zoning affecting any portion of the tract or tracts of land described herein shall be declared to be invalid, the same shall not affect the validity of the zoning of the balance of said tract or tracts of land described herein. Section 7. Any person, firm or corporation who violates, disobeys, omits, neglects or refuses to comply with or who resists the enforcement of any of the provisions of this ordinance shall be fined not more than Two Thousand Dollars ($2,000.00) for each offense. Each day that a violation is permitted to exist shall constitute a separate offense. Section 8. All rights and remedies of the City of Southlake are expressly saved as to any and all violations of the provisions of Ordinance No. 480, as amended, or any other ordinances GA0RD\Z0NINM480.144 Page 3 D--i 1 affecting zoning which have accrued at the time of the effective date of this ordinance; and, as to such accrued violations and all pending litigation,both civil and criminal, whether pending in court or not, under such ordinances, same shall not be affected by this ordinance but may be prosecuted until final disposition by the courts. Section 9. The City Secretary of the City of Southlake is hereby directed to publish the proposed ordinance or its caption and penalty together with a notice setting out the time and place for a public hearing thereon at least ten(10) days before the second reading of this ordinance, and if this ordinance provides for the imposition of any penalty,fine or forfeiture for any violation of any of its provisions,then the City Secretary shall additionally publish this ordinance in the official City newspaper one time within ten(10)days after passage of this ordinance, as required by Section 3.13 of the Charter of the City of Southlake. Section 10. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and publication as required by law, and it is so ordained. PASSED AND APPROVED on the 1st reading the day of , 1994. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY PASSED AND APPROVED on the 2nd reading the day of , 1994. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY GAORMZONING\480.144 Page 4 gn-iz. APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: CITY ATTORNEY DATE: ADOPTED: EFFECTIVE: G:\ORD\ZONING\480.144 Page 5 �a- i3 EXHIBIT "A" All that certain Lot, tract or parcel of land located in the T. M. [food Survey, Abstract 706, Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas, being all of that certain 60.93 acre tract conveyed to [tarry J. and Helen M. Bradley by Deed recorded in Volume:1749, Page 493, Deed Records, Tarrant County, Texas, and all of that certain 43.63 acre tract conveyed to Earnest E. and Helen Taylor by Deeds recorded in Volume 2312, Page 624, Volume 2741, Page 267 and Volume 3863, Page 460, Deed Records, Tarrant County, Texas and being more particularly described in one tract as follows: BEGINNING at a 1/2 inch iron pin in centerline of Peytonville Avenue said rod also being the northwest corner of the T. M. Hood Survey, Abstract 706 and the southwest corner of a 13.0 acre tract according to the Deed recorded in Volume 6366, Page 973, Deed - Records, Tarrant County, Texas; THENCE South 89 degrees 30 minutes 00 seconds East 1,966_45 feet along the south line of said 13.0 acre tract (at 1,870.01 feet passing a 3/4 inch iron rod at the southeast corner of said 13.0 acre tract) to a 1/2 inch iron rod at the northwest corner of a 5.00 acre tract according to the Deed recorded in Volume 8759, Page 64, Deed Records, Tarrant County, Texas; THENCE South 01 degrees 03 minutes 42 seconds West 325.41 feet along the west line of said 5.00 acre tract to a 1/2 inch iron rod at the northwest corner of a 3.02 acre tract according to the Deed recorded in Volume 5084, Page 310, Deed Records, Tarrant County, Texas; THENCE South 00 degrees 13 minutes 26 .seconds East 200.18 feet along the west line of said 3.02 acre tract to a 1/2 inch iron rod at the northwest corner of a 2.81 acre tract according to the Deed recorded in Volume 6928, Page 314, Deed Records, Tarrant County, Texas; THENCE South 00 degrees 34 minutes 46 seconds West 183.96 feet along the west line of said 2.81 "acre tract to a 1/2 inch iron rod at the northwest corner of a 3.0 acre tract according to the Deed recorded in Volume 6928, Page 314, Deed Records, Tarrant County, Texas; THENCE South 00 degrees 36 minutes 42 seconds West 194.36 feet along the west line of said 3.0 acre tract to a 1/2 inch iron rod at the northwest corner of a 2.49 acre tract according to the Deed recorded in volume 5169, Page 553, Deed Records, Tarrant County, Texas; THENCE South OL degrees 07 minutes 39 seconds West 157.51 feet along the west line -of said 2.49 acre tract to a 1/2 inch iron rod at the northwest corner of a 5.3 acre tract according to the Deed Recorded in Volume 3912, Page 74, Deed Records, Tarrant County, Texas; THENCE South 00 degrees 45 minutes 34 seconds West 287.79 feet along the west line of said 5.3 acre tract to a 1/2 inch iron rod at the northeast corner of a 13.75 acre tract according to the Deed Recorded in Volume 3663, Page 460, Deed Records, Tarrant County, Texas; THENCE South 00 degrees 45 minutes West 528-10 feet along the east line of said 13.75 acre tract to the northeast corner of a 24.55 acre tract according to the Deed recorded in Volume 2312. Page 624. Deed Records, Tarrant County, Texas; G-.\0RD\Z0NING\480.l44 Page 6 �D-I4 - EXHIBIT "A" THENCE South 00 degrees 42 minutes West 579.72 feet to a common ell corner of said 24.55' acre tract; THENCE South 89 degrees 52 minutes East 658.33 feet to the northeast corner of said 24.55 acre tract; THENCE South 214.44 feet to the northeast corner of a 5.53 acre tract according to the Deed recorded in Volume 2741, Page 267, Deed Records, Tarrant County, Texas; THENCE South 00 degrees 45 minutes West 147.20 feet to the southeast corner of said 5.53 acre tract; THENCE West 1,635.56 feet to the southwest corner of said 5.53 acre tract; THENCE North 00 degrees 45 minutes East 147.20 feet to the northwest corner of said 5.53 acre tract and a point in the south line of said 24.55 acre tract; THENCE West 116.96 feet to the southwest corner of said 24.55 acre tract; THENCE North 609.97 feet to the northwest corner of said 24.55 acre tract and the southernmost southwest corner of said 13.75 acre tract; THENCE North 01 degrees 04 minutes East 496.5 feet for a common ell corner of said 13.75 acre tract; THENCE South 89 degrees 44 minutes West 678_42 feet to the westerly southwest corner of said 13.75 acre tract; THENCE North 01 degrees 06 minutes 56 seconds East 1,397.36 feet along the centerline of Peytonville Avenue to the Point of Beginning and containing 103.76 acres. SAVE AND EXCEPT ONE TRACT of land known as Hood Cemetery and more particularly described as follows: BEGINNING at an iron rod in the centerline of Peytonville Avenue said rod also being at the northwest comer of the T. M. Hood Survey Abstract 706, and the southwest corner of a 13.0 acre tract according to the Deed recorded in Volume 6386, Page 973, Deed Records, Tarrant County, Texas; THENCE South 01 degrees 06 minutes 56 seconds West 637.35 feet along the centerline of Peytonville Avenue to a point; THENCE South 84 degrees 49 minutes 26 seconds East 580.18 feet (at 557.16 feet passing a 1/2 inch iron rod at the southwest corner of Lot 1, Bradley Addition to the city of Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas according to the Plat recorded in Volume 388-170, Page 31, Plat Records, Tarrant County, Texas) to a 1/2 inch iron rod in the south line of Lot 1 and the Point of Beginning; THENCE South 05 degrees LO minutes 34 seconds West 206.7L feet to a 1/2 inch iron rod; G-\0RD\Z0NINGM0.144 Page 7 EXHIBIT "A" y THENCE South 84 degrees 49 minutes 26 seconds East 208.71 feet to a 1/2 inch iron rod; THENCE North 05 degrees 10 minutes 34 seconds East 208.71 feet to a 1/2 inch iron rod in the south line of Lot 1; THENCE North 84 degrees 49 minutes 26 seconds West 208.71 feet along the south line of Lot 1 to a 1/2 inch iron rod and the Point of Beginning and containing 1.00 acres. (;AORD=MNGW80. " Page 8 O�r� EXHIBIT "B z < it 11i'li !Ill ffil•l P F jirl! i-1 1 - 3 . if 11 U; i IN Nli Nh NI E- ..6.. Iji ih,if ijil ija ii;I iii-I :1 1 if .11 -1 -,If -1 ... 9 =o a if ;> a x x! C) 13 f E v3 2 II LL) if -Sill 1 .1 ;j;! fill i, N] I go I t ed I li li If It;I i II P I l 1[ii If 1 1 i I!I i1i 11 its §ii P2 -j 4 it 41 0 I 1i 'i I Ig RIiS9 2 h1l Jig 111 29 I ; 1 1 i fig 1% 19 p in r Won �G-Al 6 2 11"13 ISSIM Ila m > 9 g u < 777 z lit i s ONX If- e114,I Ordinance No. 480-144 Page 9 City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM September 2, 1994 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Karen P. Gandy,Zoning Administrator SUBJECT: ZA 94-86 Rezoning Request(Formerly Tiffany Acres)/Ordinance No.480-139 REQUESTED ACTION: Rezoning Request of an 11.76 acre tract of land situated in the Jesse G. Allen Survey, Abstract No. 18 LOCATION: West side of Davis Blvd. F.M. 1938,approximately 875 feet North of Union Church (W. Continental Blvd.) (formerly Tiffany Acres Addition) OWNERS/APPLICANTS: V.J. Strand d/b/a V.J. Strand Excavating, Sally and Brad Scribner,Lee Roy Hess and Chris Cagle d/b/a Prestige Gunite, Inc., Robert Van Til, Individually and d/b/a Orlando Concrete, and Thomas Poteet CURRENT ZONING: "AG" Agricultural REQUESTED ZONING: "I-2" Heavy Industrial District LAND USE CATEGORY: Low Density Residential, Mixed Use, 100 Year Flood Plain NO. NOTICES SENT: Thirteen(13) RESPONSES: Nine written responses received within the 200' notification area: * E I Wiesman 2607 W. Southlake Blvd., opposed; this rezoning would destroy the residential atmosphere,concerns are dust, noise and lighting. * Barbara Ann Dudley,725 Davis Blvd., opposed; there will be more large vehicle traffic, more noise and more dust from unpaved road. * Mr. and Mrs. Bob Calhoun. 755 Davis Blvd., opposed; they want to keep country setting for their home,the zoning of heavy industry will cause noise, dust and large buildings. * Olen and Pearl Goldsberry. 10630 Davis Blvd., opposed; has lived here for 50 years and does not want sand blowing from large vehicles. *William Lippincott. 820 N. Shady Oaks Dr., opposed; owns property to the West and South, Industrial zoning would decrease his property value since the City of Southlake recently rezoned his property to Residential. * A W and June Haney.400 Brock Dr., opposed. bL�� City of Southlake,Texas * Onal White.900 Davis Blvd.,opposed; noise,dust and diesel fumes pollute the environment, the area is aesthetically unpleasing, further expansion of businesses would worsen an already difficult to cope with situation. * Scott Ducoff. Davis Industrial Partners 3301 Airport Fwy..Bedford, in favor; The property has been used for heavy industrial for many years and the location near a busy highway makes this the best use. * Morris. Billie. Tim. Pa_m, Kathy.Tracy. and M. Fanner. 684 Davis, opposed; noise, dust and diesel fumes pollute the environment, the area is aesthetically unpleasing, further expansion of businesses would worsen an already difficult to cope with situation. Nineteen written response received from outside the 200' notification area: * J.L. Clow, 820 Shady Oaks Dr., opposed; Industrial zoning is not compatible with adjacent single family residential and property values will decrease. * John and Sandra Pan=. 105 Brock Dr.,opposed;more noise and they are losing the quality of their neighborhood. *Pay and Vera Vargas,209 Brock Dr.,opposed;does not fit the quiet country quality of life, and will cause possible flooding. * Louise Ard. 303 Brock Dr.,opposed; not good for the neighborhood. * Martha Horton. 320 Brock Dr., opposed; does not want any more traffic and noise. * Alan and Carolyn Peters, 200 Brock Dr., opposed; heavy industry will be detrimental to quiet neighborhood. * Paul J. Schaeter_ 2910 W. Southlake Blvd., opposed; does not want noise and pollution in a residential area. * E. John and Nancy Keller, 2906 W. Southlake Blvd., opposed; does not want heavy industrial in quiet country atmosphere of residential area, the strip malls are enough. * Stony and Julie Stubbs. 158 Jellico Circle,opposed; this is a bad use for this property. * Nan Medcalf. 127 Jellico Circle, opposed; unsafe and too much heavy traffic. * Dorothy Sammons 2451 Union Church Keller, opposed. * Brenda Covington. 605 Llano Ct., opposed; more traffic. * Mindy Thomas. 705 Liberty Ct., opposed; unsightly, terrible first impression. * Coralee Brannon. 1365 Lakeview Dr.,opposed; does not conform to land use map, heavy industry is not appropriate since it is near residential area. * Ed and Melinda Downing. 1354 Woodbrook Ln.,opposed;this is the wrong place for "I-2". * Steve and Carroll Ovelgonne. 1352 Ten Bar Trail, opposed; this is the wrong place for "I-2" District. * Jimmy and Barbara Hornick 1994 N. Peytonville, opposed; heavy industrial is unsightly and unsafe. OL City of Southlake,Texas * Majorie A. Papillard. 319 Brock Dr., opposed; does not want added noise and disturbance created by long businss hours and heavy equipment. * Barbara Hudgens 725 Davis Blvd., opposed; noise, dust and diesel fumes pollute the environment, the area is aesthetically unpleasing, further expansion of businesses would worsen an already difficult to cope with situation. P&Z ACTION: August 18, 1994; Approved (5-1) to Deny ZA 94-86 Rezoning Request. STAFF COMMENTS: Due to the Commission's recommendation to deny, a super-majority vote of the City Council will be required to approve the request. It should also be noted that more than 20% of the land area within 200' of the request has expressed opposition. The plat of Tiffany Acres was abandoned by instrument filed in V. 10023, Pg. 1625, DRTCT. The restrictions for that addition were abandoned by instrument filed in V. 388-121, Pg. 33, PRTCT. KPG/bls G A W PRMEMO\CAS ES\94-86-Z.W PD M "Moll Imm =,= W. r r MINN' M'mm.IN 11)WIN IN WIN� • . I Pro EMU now �! Wad I out ! ,•: 44 r ' _ .: � ;vim ■�,� n w - � w n Q 0 u C w ^� A S m ¢ N rl Q 1D 0 w 't m` o `L _ o << z �iD r + Fri m w m N { ¢ cc N wcc ~ t7 + t ov 0•t ., tetet di ^ ' en w - m< m m C O C NU Qn OW ..N ^ d QO HN ` c!) 0 h N O U � K ro < C 7 a �� ` 0mu z o ru` mi `a . �! N`. N. Etm< Q. mE � m 4 0 Q <tf m QM J O ` � •' HN` D, a to .. 5 ----------ca sis asi noc13 L06 OSI ki3113HNw- •searw,t-------- Mu Z /A U< � V♦ w h , ua It Fa-f 1D 40 4 Q W U-/ Cc_ N ` ! �� m V 'ALL< N Z ' < t D t f - jCu € •- �- caO Z tt cmO LL H atj c' N "` U Z fD ID R O 2 ^ W 0 N y rl N` N d Q� la cc 7 ~ ¢N ` F- Q w QQ b Y u n �`D �Cn o T iL b cc co = N •cc =O co . m �r E a a to` —��o to r ? Q ~n ry C W J t _ K h u m< n 0 r - rf o -�1D �m � N m m < Q w •10 Q m 2 D �D r rt u m CITY OF SOUTHLAKE,TEXAS ORDINANCE NO. 480-139 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 BEIN AND MORE FULLY AND COMPLETELY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT "A" FROMT 0 . 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 kw 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 WHEREAS,the hereinafter described property is currently zoned as"A iunder 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 GAORWONINa480.139 Page 1 Q 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 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: GAORMZONING\480.139 Page 2 Bem acre tract of land situated in theme, ,,,, �� Viand more fully and completely described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein, from to 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 (W particular uses and with a view of conserving the value of buildings and encouraging the most appropriate use of land throughout the community. Section 5. That this ordinance shall be cumulative of all other ordinances of the City of Southlake, Texas, affecting zoning and shall not repeal any of the provisions of said ordinances except in those instances where provisions of those ordinances are in direct conflict with the provisions of this ordinance. Section 6. That the terms and provisions of this ordinance shall be deemed to be severable and that if the validity of the zoning affecting any portion of the tract or tracts of land described herein shall be declared to be invalid, the same shall not affect the validity of the zoning of the balance of said tract or tracts of land described herein. Section 7. Any person, firm or corporation who violates, disobeys, omits, neglects or refuses to comply with or who resists the enforcement of any of the provisions of this ordinance shall be fined not more than Two Thousand Dollars ($2,000.00) for each offense. Each day that a violation is permitted to exist shall constitute a separate offense. Section 8. All rights and remedies of the City of Southlake are expressly saved as to any and all violations of the provisions of Ordinance No. 480, as amended, or any other ordinances affecting zoning which have accrued at the time of the effective date of this ordinance; and, as to such accrued violations and all pending litigation,both civil and criminal, whether pending in court GAORDVONINM480.139 Wage 3 or not, under such ordinances, same shall not be affected by this ordinance but may be prosecuted until final disposition by the courts. Section 9. The City Secretary of the City of Southlake is hereby directed to publish the proposed ordinance or its caption and penalty together with a notice setting out the time and place for a public hearing thereon at least ten(10) days before the second reading of this ordinance, and if this ordinance provides for the imposition of any penalty, fine or forfeiture for any violation of any of its provisions,then the City Secretary shall additionally publish this ordinance in the official City newspaper one time within ten(10) days after passage of this ordinance, as required by Section 3.13 of the Charter of the City of Southlake. Section 10. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and publication as required by law, and it is so ordained. PASSED AND APPROVED on the 1st reading the day of 11994. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY PASSED AND APPROVED on the 2nd reading the day of ) 1994. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY GAORDVONINM480.139 Page 4 APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: CITY ATTORNEY DATE: ADOPTED: EFFECTIVE: G.\ORD\ZONING\480.139 Page 5 r EXHIBIT "A" 4 BEGINNING AT AN' IRON ROD IN THE WEST RIGHT—OF—WAY LINE OF F.M. HIGHWAY NO. 1938 (DAVIS BLVD.) , SAID POINT BEING LOCATED NORTH 880 FEET AND WEST 35 FEET FROM THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE SAID J. G. ALLEN SURVEY; THENCE N 87048'10" W A DISTANCE OF 1153.96 FEET TO AN IRON ROD FOR CORNER; THENCE N 1003'05" E A DISTANCE OF 440.31 FEET TO AN IRON ROD FOR CORNER; THENCE S 88011'35" E A DISTANCE OF 1153.14 FEET TO AN IRON ROD FOR CORNER IN THE WEST RIGHT—OF—WAY LINE OF F.M. HIGHWAY NO. 19 3 8; THENCE S 0058'15" W ALONG SAID RIGHT—OF—WAY LINE A DISTANCE OF 448.0 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING AND CONTAIN— ING 11.76 ACRES OF LAND. GAORMZONING\480.I39 Page 6 cbk.— l l 1III PIMA 111111101 PROPERTI ES Inc. thilw September 6, 1994 Ms. Karen Gandy Zoning Administrator City of Southlake 667 N. Carroll Ave. Southlake, Texas 76092 RE: ZA94-88 Coventry Dear Ms. Gandy; Please accept this letter as our request to table the captioned zoning action from tonight's Council agenda. Our reasons for requesting this action are: 1) In order to allow our engineer adequate time to complete the changes as requested from the City in their review ' letter number two which we received last Friday. 2) In order to allow our engineer to complete the new drawings depicting the further reduction of lots and the addition of more open space to the plan. 3) It has come to our attention that there will not be a full council at tonight's meeting. Moreover, there is a possibility that passage may require a super majority vote due to the opposition within 200 feet being greater than 20%. This appears to be in keeping with the existing Council policy of allowing an applicant to table under these circumstances. For these reasons we respectfully request the tabling of this action until September 20, 1994. Sincerely, David C. McMahan Executive Vice President 5655 Lindero Canyon Road Suite 321 Westlake Village. California 91362 818/889-0440 800/633-3458 5215 N. 0'Connor Suite 200 Irving, Texas 75039 214 /444-8322 817/329-6996 City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM September 2, 1994 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Lou Ann Heath, Director of Finance SUBJECT: Audit Firm Recommendation C At the first of August, the Finance Department sent Requests for Proposal (RFP) for professional audit services to ten accounting firms. The RFP requested a five-year contract period, with fiscal year 1994 the initial contract year. The firms contacted were those that had requested to be put on the City's bid list for audit services plus the major national firms that service municipal clients in the area. It was hoped that national firms would express an interest in proposing, however, four firms submitted proposals as listed below: FIRM NAME AMOUNT Rutledge Crain & Company, Arlington $14,950 Patillo, Brown & Hill, L.L.P., Waco $16,900 L - Day & Wagner, Dallas $18,200 Weaver & Tidwell, Dallas $18,500 All of the firms submitting proposals met the technical requirements. The following additional criteria were considered in the Staff's evaluation process. 1). Compliance with GFOA standards. Southlake participates in the Government Finance Officers Association(GFOA) Certificate of Achievement award program, and has won this award for its FY90, FY91 and FY92 audits. The FY93 audit is still under GFOA review. These audits are reviewed by GFOA affiliate and associate peer members of the Special Review Committee. Audit firms must be familiar with the program criteria to prepare statements that conform to the requirements. 2). Size of the firm and its reputation in the municipal finance field. Firms with numerous municipal audit clients, especially those with cities that are growing and dynamic, have a broader experience base and familiarity with the issues unique to cities. Southlake's financial complexity will continue over the next several years, and there will be continued interaction with the rating agencies. A firm must have an adequate work force and resources to respond to the City's needs over the next several years. r„.„ 3. Client references. An interview was conducted with one of the firms, and references were contacted on all. C Curtis E. Hawk ,, Audit Firm Recommendation September 2, 1994 page 2 The firms submitting proposals are well qualified, however, Weaver and Tidwell excels in several areas. Weaver and Tidwell represents 15 north central Texas municipalities, as well seven school districts. They are headquartered in Texas, have been in business 40+ years and have a staff of over 80 professionals. The engagement partner, Jerry Gaither, is a member of the GFOA Special Review Committee. The firm served as the City of Southlake's auditor for fiscal years 1989 through 1993. They assisted Southlake in receiving the GFOA Certificate of Achievement. Staff recommends that Weaver and Tidwell be awarded the audit contract for 1994, with the City's option to renew for an additional four years. LAH C C C C C C C ‘ City of Southlake,Texas A PERMIT OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS, GRANTING APPROVAL FOR AN ARCHERY AND BB GUN SHOOTING RANGE; SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS LISTED HEREIN; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. C I . In accordance with Ordinance No. 527, Section 4, the City Council finds that the applicant represents a responsible organization and that the request for a permit is reasonable and is in the best interest of the public . II . A Permit is hereby granted for the Archery and BB Gun Shooting Range at Camp Burnett, subject to the following specific requirements and special conditions : 1 . The applicant shall receive permission from Camp Burnett . PP 2 . The applicant shall comply with any down-range safety requirements established by the Director of Public Safety for the City of Southlake . 3 . This permit shall be for October 8 and 9, 1994 . III . This permit shall become effective on the date of approval by the City Council . PASSED AND APPROVED THIS THE (Q DAY OF , 1994 . otonnunuu,,,,�i isouryz; �y :4� CITY OF !_TH E iof ? x- AA". May.1 Gar Fickes inimlint000s andra L. LeGrand City Secretary (111W b:PERMIT2.BB/ORO/RES/kb L C ,...r,4 I. s r"V',y e °X. (-- t, v. :;, 7.,1 A I 'rn.Y V) 4r--r-74-r '; (-10 ic“, -- i.t *ie tc) cja\,..1 V\ t ± ti—T: '1 i' to ..-0() rP -1.--:' `' 'kv, '-tt: ,- / -i V "' N.. Vit- c I ..‹ I fc, C. K-9 c._9, .e p. -1-) Zs V ..(cy.>0 %,,,, I S .°°\ I V.°14 I tkiwtI 2:IIMINI,P e) o .� I " . RANGE OFFICER DOS AND DON'TS 1. ALWAYS PUT THE SAFETY OF YOUR STUDENTS AHEAD OF EVERYTHING ELSE. 2. NEVER SHOOT AT ANYTHING OTHER THAN PAPER TARGETS. Remember that B B's ricochet! 3. WORK AT THE AGE LEVEL OF YOUR STUDENTS. DON'T TALK AT AN ADULT LEVEL TO 9 YEAR OLDS. 4. GIVE ADULTS WITH YOUR STUDENTS A CONSTRUCTIVE JOB TO DO TO HELP. °`4 v` `() 5. NEVER TRY TO RUN A RANGE BY YOURSELF, ALWAYS HAVE AT LEAST TWO OTHER LINE OFFICERS WITH YOU. 6. DON'T ALLOW OTHER ADULTS TO INTIMIDATE YOU. YOU ARE IN CHARGE. .► 7. MAKE EYE CONTACT WITH THE STUDENTS YOU ARE TEACHING. 8. DO NOT ALLOW HORSEPLAY BY ANYONE ON.THE RANGE. 9. IF ANYONE CAN NOT FOLLOW THE RULES THEY ARE TO LEAVE THE RANGE IMMEDIATELY. This includes adults. 10. IF STUDENTS HAVE IDEAS THAT YOU DON'T CONSIDER SAFE, GENTLY BUT FIRMLY POINT OUT THAT SAFETY COMES FIRST, LAST AND ALWAYS. C I C C a �tb E. (wk.. C CODE OF THE DAISY tt t1 RIFLEMAN • Treat every gun as if It were loaded and ready to shoot. • Never carry a gun into your home, camp or public place loaded or cocked. • Always be sure your gun barrel is clean and not plugged. • Carry your gun so you can control the direction of the muzzle, even if you stumble. • Be sure of your target before you pull the trigger. • Never point a gun at anything you do not want to shoot. • Guns not being used should always be unloaded. • Never climb a tree or fence or jump a ditch with a loaded gun. • Never shoot at a flat, hard surface or the surface of water. • Respect other people's property. (ire C C August 15, 1994 e. RECEIVED I:16, David W. Callahan AUG 1 5 1994 Pack 507, BSA 2411 Taylor CITY SECRETAR Southlake, TX 76092 1: Mr. Curtis Hawk Southlake City Manager 667 N. Carroll Southlake, TX 76092 C Dear Mr. Hawk, I live in Emerald Estates and belong to Cub Scout Pack 507 of Johnson Ele- mentary School. I am the Pack's, Boy Scouts of America trained, BB gun Range Officer. Under the advice of Mr. Malcolm Jackson, I am writing you concerning Ordinance No. 527. Specifically, under Section 4, we wish to solicit a permit to operate a Cub Scout BB gun shooting range. On October 8th and 9th, 1994 we wish to conduct our annual "Turkey Shoot." I have arranged space, on the open grounds,at Camp Burnett for those days. I will erect my range in a secluded area on the northern portion,facing north. - It will be arranged to allow participants an entry and an exit from the south. I am enclosing a diagram and literature pertaining to location, construction and operation of a Cub Scout BB gun range. I consider myself trained and experienced. I have the mindset that if an activity cannot be done safely and well, that I will pack up and go home. I wish to offer our scouts a fun activity and responsible training. In conclusion, Mr. Hawk, I thank you and the council's kind consideration in this matter. If you wish me to be present at your next work session please call me at 488-4646. Due to work I may not be available for the September council meeting. Sincerely yours, David W. Callahan Enclosures I I Page is too large to OCR. Page is too large to OCR. Page is too large to OCR. Page is too large to OCR. Page is too large to OCR.