Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
1996-10-15 CC Packet
41 City of Southlake, Texas October 11, 1996 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 October 15, 1996 1. Agenda Item No 5A Authorize the Mayor to execute a contract for Water Ground Storage Pump Station No 1 (W Southlake Blvd at Pearson Lane) to construct on -site Mining and appurtenances. This item and the item following will allow us to continue our progress toward building the ground water storage tank at Pearson and FM 1709, by moving us into the second and third of four contracts. (The first was the contract to build the tank.) Awarding this contract will provide for the construction of pumps and other facilities on the site. The materials in your packet clearly document the bids received. Our recommendation to you is to award this bid to the low bidder, Control Specialist, for the amount of $1,498,500.00. 2. Agenda Item No 5B Authorize the Mayor to execute a contract for Water Ground Storage Pump Station No 1 to construct off -site sanitary sewer and water mains. As noted by Bob Whitehead, Director of Public Works, the proposed sanitary sewer main will provide sewer to the entire tract. The water mains will be connected to the existing transmission lines for the pump station. Again, the materials in your packet clearly document the bids received. Our recommendation to you is to award this bid to the low bidder, Saber Development Corporation, for the amount of $283,438.25. Honorable Mayor and Members of City Counil Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest October 11, 1996 Page 2 3. Agenda Item No 5C Authorize the Mayor to execute a contract for installation of a 20- inch water main along Southlake Blvd from N. White Chapel Blvd.. east to Miron Drive. We have discussed for some time the need to construct a water tower in the vicinity of the Village Center, and we acquired the Miron property for this purpose earlier this year. The construction of this water main will provide the water which will ultimately feed into the tank; however, its immediate purpose is to provide water needed due to the growth in this segment of the city. Note that the low bidder for this project was Wright Construction, for an amount of $540,231.50, with alternate bid "A" (concrete cylinder pipe). 4. Agenda Item No 5D Authorizing the Mayor to enter into agreements with Public Management Associates for citizen survey and business assessment surve. As noted in (aw the memos from Shana Yelverton, Assistant City Manager (page 5D 1), and Kate Barlow, Economic Development Coordinator (5D-85), these agreements provide for updates to our citizen satisfaction survey and business needs assessment. As explained, these surveys will provide us with updated information about the quality of services we provide, as well as citizen and business owners' opinions about the city and its activities. Your packet contains the reports from our previous survey efforts, in the event that you do not have a copy in your files. Please feel free to contact Shana or Kate if you have any questions about these projects. 5. Agenda Item No 5E Award of bid for Janitorial Services. Please note that staff is recommending that we award this bid to the second lowest bidder (by $38/year), Building Contractors, Inc. of Carrollton. After considering all factors, staff determined that this company would be better suited to provide the level of services needed for our facilities, while charging us a relatively low price for the services. Honorable Mayor and Members of City Counil Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest October 11, 1996 Page 3 Our need for a good janitorial service cannot be understated. The public traffic within our facilities demands that we contract with a provider who is meticulous, reliable, and attentive to special needs. Building Contractors, Inc. currently has contracts with the Town of Addison and the City of Carrollton. These entities presumably have facilities with uses comparable to our own. Building Contractors, Inc. received very favorable references from both. Please contact Lou Ann Heath if you have questions or concerns about this item. 6. Agenda Item No 5F Approval of a petition to modify Plat Restrictions for Lots 5 and 6. Block 3. Cimmarron Acres. We have mentioned to you during past discussions the need to process a release of the plat restriction limiting access to Jordan Drive. This document was prepared by City Attorney Wayne Olson for that purpose. The statutes require signatures of a minimum of 75 % of the owners within the addition and this has (4w been PP Upon accomplished. U approval by City Council, we will file this document in the P P County deed records. If you have any questions, feel free to contact Greg Last or Bob Whitehead. 7. Aizenda Item No 5G Resolution No 96-65 provides for a moratorium on the issuance of I&rmits for readerboard signs for ninety 90) days. This will give us time to review the provision of the sign ordinance relating to readerboard signs, and to determine whether or not City Council wants to continue granting such permits, and if so, under what conditions. Councilmembers Harris and Muller have agreed to work with staff on a committee to review this provision. We hope to get a recommendation to City Council within 35-40 days. 8. Note: Agenda Items 5H and 5I are intentionally left blank. As a reminder, whenever you see this notation, it means that an item was originally on the agenda but taken off for some reason prior to finalizing and posting the agenda, and that the other items were already numbered and printed. Honorable Mayor and Members of City Counil Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest October 11, 1996 Page 4 9. Agenda Item No 51Authorize the Mayor to enter into a contract addendum with Pepsi to provide three additional scoreboards at Bicentennial Park. You will recall that the Southlake Baseball Association successfully negotiated with Pepsi to provide scoreboards for six baseball fields at Bicentennial Park. The resulting agreement was approved by the Park Board and City Council, and provided for a seven year contract with Pepsi. The original contract is included in your packet for your review. The Southlake Girls Softball Association subsequently requested three additional scoreboards from Pepsi, which the company has agreed to, provided that they can add an additional three years to the existing contract. The City Attorney's Office is working on this addendum, but it was not available at packet preparation time. We anticipate that it will be a simple addendum and plan to provide a copy to you on Tuesday evening. 10. Agenda Item No 5K Resolution No 96-66 appointment of members to the Building Board of Appeals. The terms of three members of the Building Board of Appeals expired on October 1, 1996, and this item has been placed on the agenda to allow you to consider their reappointment. As noted in the memo from Bob Whitehead, Director of Public Works, and Paul Ward, Building Official, all three have indicated that they are willing to serve. As you know, the Board's purpose is to enforce regulations regarding substandard buildings, and to hear and decide appeals pursuant to the Uniform Building Code, Uniform Mechanical Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, Uniform Administrative Code, and National Electrical Code. 11. Agenda Item No 5L Central Regional Wastewater and Denton Creek Regional Wastewater Systems First Amendment -Interim Diversion Agreement. We have discussed the need to amend our Interim Diversion Agreement on several occasions, including the Honorable Mayor and Members of City Counil Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest October 11, 1996 Page 5 June Retreat and my memo to you dated July 19. As Bob Whitehead points out in his memo, the existing agreement which expires on November 30, 1996, requires that we end the diversion of wastewater flows from the Denton Creek Basin to the Bear Creek Basin. We cannot accomplish this until (1) the Denton Creek Pressure System sewer line from the TRA Wastewater Treatment Plant in Roanoke to Southlake is completed, sometime after the first of the year, and (2) the sewer line from approximately Kirkwood to Lonesome Dove Road is completed, which is anticipated by the end of 1997. This agreement amendment will allow us the appropriate time extension to complete our projects. Please call me, Public Works Director Bob Whitehead, or City Engineer Ron Harper if you have any questions regarding this item. 12. Agenda Item No 7A 2nd Reading Ordinance No 480-218. ZA 96-115. Rezoning approximately 17 082 acres located at the southeast corner of Florence Road and Pearson Lane Current zoning is AG with a requested zoning of SF-lA. There have been no changes in this request since City Council approval of the first reading at the last meeting. 13. Agenda Item No 7B ZA 96-116 Preliminary Plat of Lots 1-8. Block 1. The Woods Addition. The only unresolved issue related to this request is drainage. Adjacent property owners in Sutton Place are concerned about the drainage which already exists. The Planning and Zoning Commission discussed the issue with City Engineer Ron Harper and ultimately approved (6-0) the request subject to Plat Review Summary and drainage mitigation measures as summarized in the Staff Report. If you have further. questions concerning the drainage issue, please feel free to contact Ron Harper at ext. 779. 14. Aizenda Item No 7C ZA 96-113 Site Plan. Lot 4. Block 1 FASB Addition. You will recall that there are two alternatives being processed on this property: cases ZA 96-113 and ZA 96-114 we are calling alternative `A'; and cases ZA 96-127 and ZA 96-128 which QW, we are calling alternative `B.' (Note that the alternatives are not labeled on any plans, we just use `A' and `B' for ease of reference.) The main item in review of cases #113 and Honorable Mayor and Members of City Counil Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest October 11, 1996 Page 6 #114 is the requirement for a 60' ROW in non-residential properties. This has been in the subdivision ordinance (Ordinance No. 483, sect. 5.02A) for a long time. To our knowledge there has not been a street approved in a non-residential district with less than 56' of ROW. (56' was a previous ordinance requirement.) Recall that a similar proposal recently was the Stonebridge development (0-1 and C-2 at northwest corner of Davis & 1709), which did provide the 60' ROW. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval (6-1), subject to Staff Review Summary, granting relief on items noted in the Staff Report, including the requirement for a 60' ROW. To clarify a point in case it comes up, this particular lot is not subject to the requirements of the corridor because it does not have drive access to FM 1709 is not within 100' of the ROW and does not have drive access onto an arterial within 500' of FM 1709. However, the following case, ZA 96-127, is ipmactedby the corridor study requirements because it does meet the applicability requirement. 15. Agenda Item No 7D ZA 96-114 Revised Preliminary Plat for Lots 2. 3. 4. and 5. Block 1. FASB. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval (6-1) subject to Staff Review Summary granting relief to certain items as noted in the Staff Report. 16. Agenda Item No 7E ZA 96-127 Site Plan of the proposed Lot 2 Block 1. FASB. This is alternative `B' for the FASB addition. This plan reflects a successful land swap with Mr. Wilkinson in order to benefit Bicentennial Park. There are some issues that need to be addressed in order for Mr. Wilkinson to be able to develop this request, which are appropriate for executive session discussion. See my memo comment under item 36 below. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval (6-0) granting relief to certain items as noted in the Staff Report. 17. Agenda Item No 7F ZA96-128 Preliminary Plat Lots 2 &3 Block 1. FASB Addition. There are no unresolved issues related to this request. The plat does propose a landlocked Honorable Mayor and Members of City Counil Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest October 11, 1996 Page 7 lot 3 which is to be the lot acquired by the City. Approval of the preliminary plat should include a waiver of item no. 2 in the staff review letter. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval 6-0. 18. Agenda Item No 7G ZA 96-121 Site Plan for the Southlake Center at Kimball Located on the south side of Bluebonnet Drive and E. Southlake Blvd. The main issues related to this request are the provisions for interior landscape area (comment no. 2) and building articulation (comment no. 3). The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval 7-0 granting relief on the interior landscape area requirement. Feel free to contact Dennis Killough at ext. 787 if you have any questions regarding this item. 19. Agenda Item No 8A 1st Reading Ordinance No 480-212 ZA 96-96 Rezoning and Site Plan of proposed Lot 5R6 Block 3 Cimmarron Acres Addition. Current zoning is C-2 (400" with a requested zoning of CS. City of Southlake. As you are aware, there have been considerable changes to this proposal due to the neighborhood input. These plans reflect the direction given by Council during our previous discussions. The mitigation measures that we provided for the neighborhood create some noncompliance items which are referenced in the review summary. The height of the tanks exceeds the height allowed adjacent to the residential zoning we placed on our property; also, the drive location is technically not in compliance. The drive is located such that it will be a common drive for our pump station as well as the corner property on Pearson. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval 6-0 granting relief to the items noted in the Staff Report. 20. Agenda Item No 8B 1st Reading Ordinance No. 480-213, ZA 96-97, Rezoning of Proposed Lots 5RL 5R2 5R3 5R4 5R5 and 6111Block 3 Cimmarron Acres Addition Current zoning is C-2 with a requested zoning of SF-1A. City of Southlake. There should Honorable Mayor and Members of City Counil Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest October 11, 1996 Page 8 be no unresolved issues related to this request. This provides for residential zoning continuously along Jordan Drive which is what the residents wanted. The Planning and Zoning Ccmmission recommended approval 6-0. 21. Agenda Item No. 8C. ZA 96-98. Plat Revision of Lots 5111. 5112. 5R3, 5R4. 5115. and 6RL Block 3. Cimmarron Acres Addition. City of Southlake. There are no unresolved issues related to this request. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval 6-0. 22. Agenda Item No. 10A. Developer Agreement for Timarron. Village "F" Phase 1. being south of E. Southlake. Blvd., and being north of and adjacent to Timarron Addition. Brenwyck. Phase 2. The "unusual" aspects of this agreement include payment of fees and the park credits. City Engineer Ron Harper describes these in detail in his memo. However, it is important to note that Timarron does have a bank of development fee credits (not applicable to park fees) from which to draw, due to their agreement with the City for the sale of their property. This developer's agreement shows all the fees, however, you should know that credits may be applied toward the payment of these fees. Steve Yetts has indicated that he would like to meet once more with the Park Board before the final determination of park fee credits is made. This item will be considered at the Park Board meeting on Monday, October 14. Kim Lenoir (and possibly Park Board members) will be present at the Council meeting to provide you with a report.about the result of these discussions. 23. Agenda Item No 10B Commercial Developer Agreement for Georgetown Park Addition, Lot 1 being south of E Southlake Blvd and 700' east of the intersection of S. Kimball Ave. and E. Southlake Blvd. This is a standard developer's agreement, with no outstanding issues. Honorable Mayor and Members of City Counil Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest October 11, 1996 Page 9 24. Agenda Item No. IOC. FY 1996-97 Budget Items. This item continues the discussion begun during budget work sessions and continued during the October 1, 1996 City Council meeting. Again, we are placing this item on the agenda so that we have an opportunity to discuss these items with you and get your direction. Please call Lou Ann Heath with any questions you have about these budget items. 25. Agenda Item No. 10D. Requested variance to the Sign Ordinance No. 506-A. Section 16 44). for Bank of America Sign in Village Center. Phase I. As noted in Bob's memo, this request is for placement of the Bank of America sign on the Kroger store on FM 1709. The materials in the packet (staff memos, variance application, sign drawings depicting lettering and materials, building elevations, and site layout) clearly document the specifics of the request. Please let Bob know if you have any questions about this item. 26. Agenda Item Nos, 11A. 11B. I IC. and 11D. These items have been placed on the agenda at the request of Councilmember Fawks. Your packet contains memos and supporting documentation for each item, which we hope will be sufficient to remind you where we are in the process. These items are on the agenda as discussion items so that we may get your direction on some of the policy issues and so that you can, as a group, determine priorities for us as staff. Your next agenda will include an item to allow you to discuss and act upon priorities, including major ordinances, plan updates, and other projects. This is needed due to limited Council, Board, and staff time. It is my opinion that each of these important items will require several meetings and hours of work. Honorable Mayor and Members of City Counil Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest October 11, 1996 (naw Page 10 If you have questions about any of the technical aspects of these items, please contact Greg Last, Director of Community Development, or Zoning Administrator Karen Gandy. If you would like to discuss the prioritization process, please feel free to call me directly. See comments for a few of these items below: Agenda Item No. 11B. Residential PUD density calculation (gross vs net) As noted in the staff memo, the zoning ordinance bases density on gross acres which is an industry standard. If the current ration of 2.18 du/ac is not providing the desired result, staff recommends that the ratio be changed, but that the calculation continue to be based on gross acreage. Please contact Zoning Administrator Karen Gandy at ext. 743 if you have any questions on this matter. Agenda Item No. 11C. Neighborhood Preservation Ordinance. This ordinance has been under consideration for almost 20 months with the first draft being dated January 5, 1995. Staff has provided copies of the latest draft and support documentation. Note the Attorneys' concerns with the current draft in their letters on pages 11C-7 through 11C-10 (e.g., limitation of delivery hours, regulation of mansard roof systems, and possible conflicts in "yard" regulations). Please contact Karen Gandy at ext. 743 or Greg Last at ext. 744 if you have questions on the Neighborhood Preservation Ordinance. Agenda Item No. 11D. Outside Storage. As you recall, outside storage became a topic of discussion earlier this year in the review of Ordinance No. 480-T which failed at the second reading. This ordinance specifically addressed retail outside storage (i.e., Wal-Mart's layaway container storage). I understand that Wal-Mart may again approach the City Council with the same request in the very near future. Staff feels that when outside storage is revisited, Sections 38 ("Outside Storage") and 39 ("Screening") in their entirety should be revised. As noted in the staff Honorable Mayor and Members of City Counil Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest October 11, 1996 Page 11 memo, the City Council may wish to consider regulating outside (outdoor) display for certain retail uses. Please contact Karen Gandy at ext. 743 if you have questions on this matter. 27. Agenda Item No. 11E. Discussion of reimbursement policy for City Council expenses pursuant to Southlake Home Rule Charter. Section 2 OS It is my understanding that Councilmembers Fawks, Martin and Muller and City Secretary Sandy LeGrand have met once to discuss this issue, and plan to meet again on Monday to continue their work. The group may have something prepared to hand out to you on Tuesday evening, but even if they are not ready to provide anything in writing, the item is on the agenda so it can be discussed by the full Council. OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST 28. Status of Utility Placement Ordinance - You may recall that we have intended, since the last joint meeting held with the Planning & Zoning Commission, to bring you a utility placement ordinance for your consideration. The ordinance is almost complete and should be coming to you at one of your Council meetings in November. The holdup? We are reviewing the ordinance to make sure that it covers not only the utility issues we have been struggling with, but also issues we may struggle with in the future as a result of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. If you have any questions about this ordinance, please feel free to call Bob Whitehead at extension 741. 29. Toyoma Dance Troupe Performances -- wonderful! The group arrived in Texas late Saturday and performed as part of the Sun & Star celebration in the Fall Festival on Sunday. Their performance in Dallas was riveting, and celebration organizers lamented the fact that they had not scheduled more performances for the group. On Monday at (aw 10:00 a.m., the group gave a special performance for Carroll High School students and the Southlake public. Again, this performance of traditional Japanese dances was well Honorable Mayor and Members of City Counil Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest October 11, 1996 Page 12 received by the audience. FYI, we have a couple of videotapes that we are reviewing for possible rebroadcast on the cable channel. 30. Joint Meeting with SPIN Standing Committee - This meeting is scheduled for Thursday, October 24. An agenda with the time and location will be provided to you in the near future. The Executive Committee will be discussing agenda topics at their meeting on October 16, but if you have any ideas, please feel free to pass those along to Shana Yelverton at ext. 705. 31. Joint Meeting with Park Board - Staff has been discussing the desire of the Park Board to meet with City Council, particularly the chosen date of October 22. There are two issues that have been raised: 1) the month of October is full of meetings and therefore not convenient for Council participation in a major joint work session, and 2) the Bob Jones Park issue continues. There are several issues that the Park Board would like to discuss with the City Council. If the work session is held prior to consideration of the park plan by Council, Bob Jones will undoubtedly dominate the evening. We recognize the need for the Council to fully understand the work of the Park Board on the Bob Jones Park plan, and intend to provide you with background material plus a formal presentation when the plan comes to Council. However, we believe that any attempt to meet and discuss other important issues will be futile since it is likely that the meeting would draw a crowd and the Council/Park Board would be forced to discuss the plan at the expense of the other issues. In short, we would recommend that the approval process for Bob Jones Park plan continue through its normal course prior to holding a work session between the Park Board and City Council. We must continue to make this plan the top priority. Honorable Mayor and Members of City Counil Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest October 11, 1996 Page 13 We are looking at early December as a possible joint meeting date. This will allow the plan to make its way through the channels toward final approval, and allow you to meet with the Park Board to discuss many of the other issues still on the horizon. Please let me or Shana Yelverton know if you have any questions or comments about delaying the work session. 32. Bob Jones Park Master Plan Update - I believe you are all well aware of the arduous process the Park Board has undertaken to master plan this park. This incredible effort has included over 20 public meetings and numerous revisions to the proposed plan. You are probably also, well aware that the SPIN/Park Board meetings were lively and full of emotion, with little indication that the neighborhood would be satisfied with anything the Board might approve. After the SPIN meetings, staff met to discuss possible compromises which could meet the needs of all involved. We came up with several ideas, which we then discussed with selected Park Board members in order to determine how the Board would react to them. The Board held a work session on Thursday evening, October 10 to discuss the changes. It is my understanding that the meeting went vgr well, and that the neighborhood was pleased with the proposed changes. The Board feels comfortable with the changes as well. The next step in the process is for the Board to formally act on the plan. This is scheduled for Monday, October 14. Although we realize that we have probably not fully met the concerns of everyone, we are confident that the compromise plan is a good one which comes as close to providing a plan we can all live with as anything else that might be proposed. Once approved by the Park Board, the plan will move forward so that the Planning & Zoning Commission can review the infrastructure issues. Once out of P&Z, Honorable Mayor and Members of City Counil Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest October 11, 1996 Page 14 you will have your opportunity to review it. By the way, if you have the chance, you may want to express your appreciation to the Park Board. They have worked very hard on this project! 33. Seal Coat Program Update - The contractor on this project, Viking Construction, is moving along quite well. The work in Woodland Heights is almost complete, lacking only some patching which will have to be done by hand. Work in Cross Timber Hills progressed this week, but an equipment problem on Wednesday caused the contractor to lose a day of work. This probably caused inconveniences to the residents, but we have not received any calls on it to date. We anticipate beginning the Lake Wood Acres part of the project by next Wednesday. Q34. Thoroughfare Plan Update - A meeting sponsored by SPIN to seek public input is e tentatively scheduled for Tuesday, October 29 at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chamber. Please feel free to contact Tom Elgin at ext. 753 if you have questions on the MTP update. 35. Exchange Contract with Crossroads Square. Ltd. - On October 1, City Council approved the execution of an exchange contract between the city and Crossroads Square, Ltd., subject to the city attorney's review and revisions. On October 8, City Attorney Wayne Olson forwarded recommended changes to Crossroads Square legal counsel. The most notable changes included: 1. Regarding obligations: The "City's Remedy" will read the same as "Crossroads' Remedies." 2. Under "Crossroads' Covenants" insert I.: "After closing, preserve and maintain in perpetuity all existing trees along the eastern portion of the Land, which trees shall not be removed to accommodate Crossroads' planned development on the ,,, Land." Honorable Mayor and Members of City Counil Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest October 11, 1996 Page 15 36. Pending Litigations - During the Executive Session, the city attorney will be prepared to brief City Council on the status of the listed pending and contemplated litigation. On a related note, attached is a letter from Mr. Terry Wilkinson regarding the appraisal of the back portion of the FASB tract. We have also received the appraisal on the Brunson property and will discuss both of these in executive session Tuesday night. We will also update you on progress to date concerning acquisition of the Ruetlinger property. 37. i j oming Meetings and Events Please see the attached calendar for dates to remember on upcoming meetings and events. 38. Telephone Problems - If you have tried to call us lately, you have probably noticed that it has been rather difficult to get through. The System 25 at City Hall has been crashing on and off for weeks. It appears to happen during the peak call load times of the day. Y GTE and AT&T have been working on the problem, and just about anything and everything that could be replaced, has been. Unfortunately, they are still baffled as to the exact cause of the problem, even though their engineers in Denver are studying the problem. We intend to have a meeting with the regional managers for GTE and AT&T this coming week to convey to them our extreme displeasure over the inconvenience this has caused to our citizens. The good news is that the problems have not affected the 911 system, so emergency calls are still received in Communications. 39. Stebbins Letter of Intent - Attached is a memo from the department directors regarding their review of the Brian Stebbins Letter of Intent for the Town Center Municipal Building. I requested that they review the Letter of Intent so that issues are identified for you as you consider Stebbins' proposal. I am sure you have all seen the Letter of Intent, but a copy of it is also enclosed with the directors' memo. Of the issues that have been Honorable Mayor and Members of City Counil Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest October 11, 1996 Page 16 identified, some are minor, but some of the issues are clearly statutory in nature. Hopefully, this memo will assist you in formulating your response to his proposal. We will discuss this further in executive session. As an aside, the Municipal Complex Planning Committee met on Tuesday, October 8 to review three alternative conceptual site plans, based on the input received from the committee at the design charette. The committee selected one of the architects' proposals for further refinement and on October 21, the architects will present plan and elevation drawings for this alternative. Staff has met again and reviewed the recommendations of the interiors subcommittee, further refining our space needs analysis. If you have any questions about progress to date on the municipal complex planning process, please do not hesitate to call Greg Last or Bob Whitehead. 40. United Way Kick-off - You are invited to join us for our United Way kick-off on Friday, October 25 from 11:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. The UW Employee Campaign committee has put together quite an event! There will be a chili cook -off, bake -off contest, best costume contest, a pie eating contest, and special entertainment by the "Village People." Last year, Southlake city employees raised more than $12,000 for the United Way campaign, placing us first in per capita giving in the municipal government category at $97.35. (North Richland Hills was second at $63.38.) I am very proud of the generosity of our employees, and know that we will again make a significant contribution to this worthwhile cause. I hope you will join us and I look forward to seeing you on Friday, October 25. Feel free to come in costume!! �We 41. Tree Preservation Ordinance - Attached to my memo is a copy of a presentation on Tree Preservation which Greg Last presented to the state chapter meeting of the American Honorable Mayor and Members of City Counil Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest October 11, 1996 Page 17 Planning Association last week in San Antonio. Feel free to contact Greg if you have any questions about the information. 42. DPS visits North_ Carolina Racetrack - Note the attached report provided by Director of Public Safety Billy Campbell on the visit to the North Carolina racetrack. Also, members from area Chambers of Commerce, including Sandra Baber from the Southlake Chamber, made a site visit to North Carolina. Channel 5 News interviewed Ms. Baber yesterday about her visit, and they plan to air the interview on Wednesday, October 23, at 6:00 p.m. 43. Lunch with City Manager - Effective this Monday, October 14, I am beginning something new. I will be available for informal lunches every Monday with City Council to discuss any day-to-day questions or comments you may have, with the exception of the Monday Y of the monthly Chamber Luncheon. (I encourage each of you to attend the Chamber Luncheon with us. If you wish to attend these let us know and we will arrange it with Sandra Baber.) Luncheons in my office will be limited to three Councilmembers, due to the obvious reasons, however, we should be able to fit everyone in at least every other week. As you know, I usually meet with Mayor Stacy on Tuesdays of Council meeting day to go over the agenda items for that evening since the Mayor by Charter presides over the meetings of the City Council. However, there is so much going on that I feel I need to also schedule out a block of time to be available if you have questions about the City Council agenda or other items of interest. AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE TO THE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE AND PEPSI-COLA This Amendment entered into on this day of , 1996, by and between the City of Southlake, Texas ( the "City") and Pepsi -Cola Products ("Pepsi -Cola"). Whereas, on February 6, 1996, the City of Southlake Texas entered into a contract with Pepsi -Cola for the provision of scoreboard signs for Bicentennial Park in exchange for the City's action to require those associations who utilize the Park to sell Pepsi -Cola products (the "Contract"); and Whereas, Pepsi -Cola wishes to provide the City with three additional scoreboard signs in exchange for extending the term of the Contract for three years; NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties agree to amend the Contract in the following respects: I. The following sentence is hereby added to the paragraph entitled "Consideration:" Not later than December 1, 1996, Pepsi -Cola will purchase and deliver three additional scoreboard signs,in the amount of $9,948.00, for the City of Southlake. II. The following paragraph shall replace the paragraph entitled "Term": This Contract shall have a term of ten (10) years, commencing February 6, 1996, and expiring at 12:01 a.m., February 7, 2006. The paragraph entitled "Cancellation" is amended to read as follows: This Contract may be terminated at any time after 120 months by either party upon thirty (30) days written notice to the other party. Customer may terminate the Contract at an earlier date, with 30 days' notice. If Customer terminates the Contract, Customer shall return all equipment, including the scoreboards furnished by Pepsi -Cola, to Pepsi -Cola, except that Customer may purchase the scoreboards on a pro rata basis, based on the ten (10) year term f:\files\slake\contract\pepsi.amd Page 1 of the Contract. If the Contract is terminated after 120 months, the scoreboards shall become the property of Customer without charge. In all other respects, the terms and provisions of the Contract of February 6, 1996 shall be controlling and in full force and effect. CITY OF SOUTHLAKE Curtis Hawk, City Manager Date PEPSI-COLA Authorized Representative - Title f:\files\slake\contract\pepsi.amd Page 2 M It—NNM1-4 d' CO)e-M�NWLOM tl) (0 V IONOONmO(O.Zt 00 (a OO Vt N C'i 6 C4 CA CO 0 0 Ll CA Y O O 6f} 69 6H 6fi 6f} 69 69 69 N �} } 3 0 CL � X T- E C > W � N It M co CU p o V M —NOOMv 00 0 W » a LO C) r- O 1-Ln rn C'Mf`00t, (OOCAto0 0 O O D c =p6g N "- OMONCOtn V tn0 O co L (M(OOC vm61}f-I� M 00 6q EA 69 69 64 O O co A CA �- (O O (O O O (O V M CO N M(Ovmr-00(Ao N v L CU Nu' N CA N -, LoC)L NNCA�N004 (O to COY ON N U — 69 6Fi fA 69, 69- 69, 69 60. 6e 14 69 a) co cn 0 69 m L t0 CD m C — ti ;o (A Q O L O E ^ +' co 000000000 V)-p N � a� (L o -O OOd'OOOONO Na) �} N CU �OpOO�000r- I` X -p C OLL (Ccu L � (a �� OM OMOC)00000 CO +-�' tiL-CV O to cn OdT-cf)(OCOtnAA cM �CU�N a= (D Mfl_f- t ��,, B} ..�0 UQ a 6660 6 N CL Q-� O U fC N = (n L- c �� NNOONNNN'Td' V -O J N OO C� �� ������ cu QO � �CU a C`•'a CA cL N000000000000M00v �, aO Q-N OQ �O cu JE 000000000� a N O C fa NNNNNNNNNN �' C O 5 O 0 E N O N (n N OOMOCOOOOCO� 00 (n O Q. NOCOOLOOOCOO LO CDC)O Ca }, L O O(OL6OONO CM � CA E +' Q a LO�McMcMW cMf-- 'V 00 IV O C L � > O L (p N O U Co a N N p Q) O_N N N '� Ni' +r fl. O O 'F N X � LL m ccLo L"C7 U N p V (Q J U Co 69 a (ti O •- (n r CO 06 ELM O C m �-}�+' 0 -Nmm !d MM L L LL L C -D Y L ) NO000)G)M O .0 O a) O� O L COO O OCAOCA0000O �MMMNNN'Ct'd'T- E U O C1 O d aaaaaaaaaa P.__ cr- ca a.pv October 10, 1996 Mr. Curtis Hawk City Manager, City of Southlake 667 North Carroll Avenue Southlake, Texas 76092 Re: Valuation of 2.858 Acres of land located west of Whites Chapel and north of Southlake Blvd. Dear Mr. Hawk I am in receipt of a portion of the appraisal prepared by Ken Huffman. I am in agreement with some of his conclusions, however I think there is one major flaw in the approach that has been taken. In the appraisal, the description of the property states "Thus Tract C has no frontage along any existing roads." I would have to agree that if this property is viewed as having no frontage and therefore no buildings could be constructed on the property the value of the property would be low. However if you analyze the property as conditions really exist, as part of a larger tract with frontage, and therefore buildings may be constructed on the site, the appraisal's conclusion will be significantly higher value. After our meeting, where I first learned the results of Mr. Huffman's appraisal, I contacted the broker through which have bought this property. He had previously told me that an appraisal was prepared for the estate taxes of Mr. Herman nith as of date of death, August 15, 1994. (As this appraisal was prepared for the estate valuation reasons, it would O ormally be done at the lowest possible value.) Mrs. Smith authorized James K. Norwood, MAI, ARA to release a copy of their appraisal to me. As you will see the value of the property was $500,000. or $3.00 per sq. ft. as of August 1994. The appraiser told me in light of the fact that Southlake Blvd. has been enlarged, and the amount of commercial activity that has taken place in this area, the property should be worth considerable more. My original plans were to develop this 3.83 acre tract into 4 commercial lots. As you may note in Mr. Huffinan's appraisal, developed C-2 Commercial lots sell between $4.25 and $6.25. At the request of the city, I have held up on my development plans, however if I had proceeded with my original plans I would have started development of this tract on September 20. Therefore I think it is fair to look at the value of the land as if it was developed, taking into consideration this very desirable location in the middle of Southlake (the same reasons Tom Thumb wants this location). Since Mr. Huffman was working with the false assumption that the property had no frontage, and therefore was unbuildable he has used comparable land sales that bare no resemblance or relationship to the location, or type of property that exist at this tract. I would like to encourage you to look at the comparable land sales that Mr. Huffman used. Only one (valued at $3.37 per sq. ft.) is located anywhere near this property, the others are either Zoned industrial, do not have sewer available, are land locked, or in an undesirable location. At the city's request, I have agreed to consider a land swap of 124,473 sq. ft. of my property, for the adjacent 104,225 sq. ft. property that the city is in the process of acquiring. I have also agreed to pay an additional $1.00 per sq. ft. totaling $104,255. Needless to say, I am very disappointed in the appraiser's work, I request that you look past his report, and look at the real facts and conditions. I think that the land swap will be good for the city park and I am willing to trade. As I have previously stated, I have a tenant for a 12,000 sq. ft. office building. The company is in the computer software development business, and two of it's principals live in Southlake. Their business is rapidly growing and they need be in their space by January 31. They have been able to get a one month extension, however they will have to pay a 201/6 Went premium, and they don't think they can get any additional extensions. If the building is not complete by the end of February, I will have to pay all cost relating to their holdover, and they have the right to terminate the lease agreement with me. Therefore I have had to start dirt work on the property fronting on Southlake Blvd.. If the City Council approves this land • 930 Parkview Lane, Southlake, Texas 76092 • (817) 329-4599 • fax (817) 488-2420- �rap, I will proceed with the building on this site. If the City Council does not approve this land swap, I request that the ,,iginal plat and site plan be approved so that I can proceed with construction of this building on lot 4. In conclusion, I have been patient and tried to be responsive to the City's needs and requests. I have spent $40,390 with Goodwin and Marshall on the engineering, platting and site plan for my original plan. Due to the city's request that I look at alternate plans, and my time crunch, I am incurring other costs for this alternative plan. Therefore, I believe it is reasonable to expect the city to assist me with some of these costs. Possible the adjustment or waiver of the impact fees would be a possible way to handle this. Thank you for your consideration of this complex issue. Sincerely, z C� Terry L. Wilkinson o w � J J J O� O� �oKgo 3omdoo n � J cn .5� n cct o �okb��m no oo� n t7 CD `-' two N (9 rn pCD � 30 0 J � nw o 10 CD 7d w OD a z CD a � CU C I W CD 0 CD �.0 • V CD N 5, til City of Southlake, Texas IuILD2u [I October 10, 1996 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Directors SUBJECT: Draft Letter of Intent received September 30, 1996 Town Center Municipal Building Following are some issues that should be further evaluated as it pertains to the above referenced Letter of Intent (LOI). We have not yet had an opportunity to meet collectively to discuss alternative methods of resolution yet but we are available for this discussion at your request. Page Section Comment 1 Purchaser Recommend addresses, phone, contact person. 1 Seller Recommend addresses, phone, contact person. 1 Purchase Price Do we need to purchase the parking area? Could we not lease this area? Otherwise we will probably need some kind of reciprocal parking agreement because the parking will probably be needed as well for other uses. (The fact that it will be used for the retail as well is noted on Page 3, item b.1.) 1 Purchase Price Potentially we could close on property that was only defined at the Concept Plan level. We may need to require better definition of the property. Also, do we want to pay cash up front without some commitment that the developer will build the infrastructure? 2. Earnest Money Title company of the City's choosing? 2 Closing Closing will likely be contingent on bond elections and the timing thereof will not be possible in a 30 day time frame. 2 Closing This paragraph references "Special Conditions" and the next page calls it "Special Provisions." (minor point but should be the same) 3 First Refusal Exhibit `B' is the same as Exhibit `A'. Recommend that the office buildings discussed be highlighted somehow on the exhibit. 3 Repurchase Item 1: Do we run into legal limitations regarding selling property at City of Southlake, Texas some point in the future? i.e. Do we have to get appraisals, etc. or can we just arrange for the repurchases by contract? 3 Repurchase Item 2: We may want to add that the Seller must also pay for any improvements constructed by Purchaser. What if we construct a nice building that ultimately is too small or something and we want to sell the site and building. This wording allows repurchase for only the cost of the initial land deal. 4 Closing Cond. We need to confirm the legality of items 1 & 2. On items 3 and 4 there are too many variables at play currently with the committee for the municipal complex. It may be difficult to commit to this time line just now, because of the bond election, type of construction, size of construction etc. that are still being contemplated. 4 Dev Plan Appr Need to provide better definition in Exhibit `C'. There is no area delineated for the development plan. 4 Financing It may be possible to have a bond election by that date but seems unlikely we would sell bonds by that date. 4 Construction It is unlikely that we would have construction drawings completed, the job bid and construction underway in 4 months. 5 Use Restriction Apparently parcels `B' and `C' are reversed. It is our understanding that the building would be constructed on parcel `B'. 5 Use Restriction It might not be wise to limit he uses on the City Hall tract to only City Hall and CISD. I have heard discussions allowing libraries, sub - courthouses, tax offices, etc. Maybe better off saying that the uses within the CS district of the zoning ordinance would be allowed. 5 Parking Esmt Seller may utilize seller's contractors, at commercially competitive pricing and the City is to reimburse for its share of the work. How does this fit with Public Works director, competitive bidding, etc.? 5 Parking Esmt We probably should have a provision allowing Seller to construct parking on `C' and purchaser to reimburse. Seller may need parking to support retail before we are ready to construct. 5 Parking Esmt Purchaser should control the specifications of the parking lot. If Seller wants to upgrade the parking based on anticipation of future construction, Seller should pay for the increases in costs. City of Southlake, Texas 5 Parking Esmt Purchaser should think about requiring a certain area within parcel `C' (if not all of `C') as reserved parking. 10 slots north of City Hall is not much. What if we get into a situation where the retail is using our parking lot and the Seller is unable or unwilling to construct additional parking? Landscaping Do we know how much we were going to spend on the other site for landscaping? It is likely that the amount we intend to spend over time on the Timarron site could not be spent on the Purchaser site. There will not be enough open areas on the perimeter to expend the same funds. 6 Top of page Is this a duplicate of the part on page 5 regarding the parking easement? There should probably be some contingencies on when the Seller can construct improvements that the Purchaser must reimburse. 6 City Hall Design Design shall be subject to seller's approval of seller's plans and specs. Could they hold up the project until they got a design that they wanted? May want to add the legal wording "reasonable review and approval" somewhere. Please let us know if you would like any of these issues pursued further. DRAFT REC'D S E P 3 01996 The Honorable Rick Stacy Mayor, City of Southlake 1725 E. Southlake Boulevard Southlake, Texas 76092 Re: Combined New City Hall/School Administration Building Corner of Southlake Blvd. and North Carroll Ave. Dear Rick: We are excited about the inclusion of the new City Hall/School Administration building in Southlake's new downtown. This letter is for your consideration and is intended to outline the general terms we have discussed to date for the purchase and sale agreement. ;ER'RCHASER: The City of Southlake, a Texas home rule municipality ELL. Southlake Venture West, L.P., a Texas limited partnership PROPERTY: Parcel A: approx. 2.5 acres (108,900 sq. ft.) of land (Parking) Parcel B: approx. 0.93 acres (40,500 sq. ft.) of land (Building) Parcel C: approx. 1.07 acres (46,500 sq. ft.) of land (Town Square) All situated in the City of Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas, and generally as outlined in the proposed site plan attached as Exhibit A. Such Parcels are part of a 13 1. 1 acre planned non-residential planned unit development to be known as Southlake Town Center. The land is unimproved and will be sold or otherwise conveyed as provided herein "as is". PURCHASE PRICE: Parcel A:$217,800 ($2.00 psf) Parcel B: $0 ($0 psf) Parcel C: $0 ($0 psf) for a total of Two Hundred Seventeen Thousand Eight Hundred and 00/100 Dollars ($217,800.00), to be paid in cash at closing. The City of Southlake ,ptember 16, 1996 �Wage 2 DRAFT EARNEST MONEY: $10,000 to be deposited with the title company within three (3) business days after the purchase and sale contract is executed by Purchaser and Seller. INSPECTION PERIOD: Purchaser shall have a sixty (60) day inspection period to study the Property. If Purchaser elects to terminate the agreement on or before all conditions to closing described herein have been satisfied or waived, the Earnest Money shall be returned to Purchaser and the agreement shall terminate. When all conditions to closing described below have been satisfied or waived, then the Earnest Money shall become non-refundable, but shall apply towards the purchase price. EXTENSION: Purchaser shall have one (1) option to extend the inspection period an additional thirty (30) days. CLOSING: If Purchaser does not elect to terminate the agreement as provided herein, Purchaser shall close on the purchase within thirty (30) days after the satisfaction of all conditions to closing described under "Special Conditions" below. �WCOMMISSION: No commission shall be due or payable in connection with this transaction. CLOSING COSTS: Seller shall pay for the standard owner's policy of title insurance, survey, deed preparation, tax certificate and one-half of any escrow fees. Purchaser shall pay for the survey deletion to the owner's policy of title insurance (if required) and one-half of any escrow fees. Property taxes shall be pro -rated; provided Seller shall be responsible for the payment of roll back taxes, if any. TITLE INSURANCE: Seller, at Seller's cost, will provide a current survey and an owner's title insurance policy issued by a mutually acceptable title insurance company. The survey and title exceptions must be to Purchaser's satisfaction, which shall be determined during the inspection period. The City of Southlake ptember 16, 1996 (4�ge 3 SPECIAL PROVISIONS DRAFT a) Right of First Refusal: From and after January 1, 2000, Seller shall grant Purchaser the right of first refusal on up to 20,000 square feet of additional office space in one of the three buildings to be constructed by Seller around the new City Hall/School Administration Building, as shown on Exhibit B attached. In the event Seller wishes to accept a bona fide offer from a third party to lease not less than 2,000 square feet of available space within such buildings, Seller shall deliver notice thereof to Purchaser. If Purchaser wishes to lease such space on the terms and conditions offered to such third party, then Purchaser shall notify Seller within fifteen (15) business days after Purchaser receives Seller's notice. Purchaser's right of first refusal described herein shall expire on December 31, 2010. (If the City/School Administration wants a guarantee of the availability of a certain amount of space five (S) or ten (10) years out, this can also be incorporated.) b) Options to Repurchase: Pursuant to the agreement, Purchaser shall grant Seller (from and after the Closing Date) the right and option to re -purchase the Property for an amount equal to the price provided for herein, upon the following terms and conditions: 1. Parcel A Parking Structure. Purchaser and Seller acknowledge that Parcel A has been designated to accommodate the parking needs of both the new City Hall/School Administration Building and the overall Southlake Town Center development. Initially, such needs can be met by the provision of surface parking. Over time, as development occurs, structured parking may be required, utilizing all or part of Parcel A. In the event Seller wishes or is required to construct structured parking on Parcel A for Southlake Town Center, Seller shall have the option to repurchase Parcel A for the purpose of providing such additional parking; provided Seller shall make available to Purchaser in such parking structure a number of parking spaces equivalent to the number of spaces constructed initially by or on behalf of Purchaser as provided herein. L, f3-WW. The City of Southlake DRAFT ,tptember 16, 1996 ge 4 Such right to repurchase shall expire if not exercised on or before December 31, 2048, and shall be subject to Seller's actual construction of structured parking within twelve (12) months of the date such option is exercised. 2. Third Party Offer. In the event that Purchaser wishes to accept a bona fide offer from a third party to purchase all or any portion of the Property, Purchaser shall deliver notice thereof to Seller. If Seller wishes to re -purchase the Property for the price at which Seller initially sold the Property to Purchaser, then Seller shall notify Purchaser within fifteen (15) business days after Seller receives Purchaser's notice. Seller's right to re -purchase described herein shall expire if not exercised on or before December 31, 2048. c) Closing Conditions: The agreement shall be expressly contingent upon occurrence of each of the events and actions described below by the parties identified within the timeframes shown. In the event any such condition shall not be satisfied within the timeframe indicated, the agreement shall terminate and both parties shall be relieved of further obligation thereunder. 1. Concept Plan Approval. Seller's receipt of concept plan approval for a non-residential planned unit development covering not less than 100 acres of Southlake Town Center on or before June 30, 1997. 2. Development Plan Approval. Seller's receipt of development plan approval for not less than ten (10) acres of land on or before December 31, 1997. The minimum size and boundaries of the initial development plan approval, including necessary streets, sidewalks and private drives, shall be as depicted in Exhibit C attached. 3. Financing. Purchaser's sale of bonds or provision for alternate sources of funding to finance the new City HaIUSchool Administration Building on or before June 1, 1997. 4. Construction. Purchaser shall have commenced construction of a new City Hall/School Administration Building of not less than 50,000 square feet on or before October 1, 1997. �W v thaw • CiT dlw�li� The City of Southlake September 16, 1996 ige S DRAFT d) Use Restriction: At closing, the Property shall be deed restricted to the following uses: Parcel A: parking Parcel B: dedicated public open space for use as a town square Parcel C: development of a new City Hall/School Administration Building for the City of Southlake e) Parking Easement Purchaser shall, at its sole cost and expense, construct on Parcel C to Seller's construction specifications not less than eight (8) parking spaces for the first 1,000 square feet of floor area and one (1) parking space for each 300 square feet of additional floor area in the new City Hall/School Administration Building to be built on Parcel B. Purchaser and Seller shall grant mutual parking easements to allow all or substantially all parking within Southlake Town Center to be available to project owners, tenants, customers and other employees, contractors, licensees and invitees, subject to certain reserved parking which may be agreed from time to time, including but not limited to the following restrictions: (1) employees of the City Hall shall be required to utilize the parking to be constructed by Purchaser on Parcel A (or substitute parking provided by Seller in a parking structure to be constructed by Seller in the event Seller elects to exercise its option to repurchase Parcel A from Purchaser as provided herein; and (2) Purchaser shall be entitled to ten (10) reserved spaces on the street in front of the north side of the new City Hall/School Administration Building block. At Setter's option, Seller may utilize Seller's contractors, at commercially competitive pricing, to perform Purchaser's construction obligations on Parcel A as part of Seller's overall development of Southlake Town Center, and Purchaser shall reimburse Seller for its share of any and all such work by Seller on its behalf. f) Landscaping Purchaser shall landscape the Property in accordance with Seller's approved landscape plan; provided, however, Purchaser's, cost in providing such landscaping shall not exceed $ in total. (Per our discussions to date, it is the intent that Purchaser will spend an equivalent amount to what was contemplated for the City HalUSchool Administration facility on the Timarron/Richards site) In the event the final costs of landscaping pursuant to Seller's landscape plan exceed such amount, Seller shall bear all such additional costs. (4", Wtiew-CAYOU.Mk. The City of Southlake DRAFT September 16, 1996 (44� ige 6 At Seller's option, Seller may utilize Seller's contractors, at commercially competitive pricing, to perform Purchaser's construction obligations on Parcel A as part of Seller's overall development of Southlake Town Center, and Purchaser shall reimburse Seller up to the amount nominated herein for its share of any and all such work done by Seller on its behalf. g) City Hall Design Purchaser shall have the responsibility for the design and construction of the new City Hall/School Administration Building on Parcel B. Design and construction shall be subject to Seller's approval of Purchaser's plans and specifications prior to the commencement of any improvements by Purchaser. AGREEMENT: A purchase and sale agreement embodying the above -described terms and conditions shall be negotiated, completed and signed by both parties within sixty (60) days from the date of this letter. EXPIRATION: The general terms proposed herein shall expire sixty (60) days from the date of this letter. these business terms are acceptable, please sign in the space designated below and return one copy this letter to the undersigned as soon as possible. Upon receipt, we will immediately commence legal documentation. It is expressly agreed and understood that no party hereto shall have any obligations hereunder until a purchase and sale agreement is fully executed. Naturally, if you should have any questions, please feel free to call. Sincerely, SOUTHLAKE VENTURE WEST L.P., a Texas limited partnership By: Rialto Southlake West, L.P its General Partner By: Rialto Southlake Property West, L.L.C., its General Partner Brian R. Stebbins President Ca d rer . C4 J7arlb THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE Its CXHrBIT "A" RfAILTO DEVELOP!,,, .;irk D A VM AltCjUT.t:C,njF(.kl. s I VjC.j!.5. LI m U EXTIrBrT "B's Z /011 /* A. '.FAST SO.UTML.Aft SLV! 1(F„ f t709) S110 PA %1D hf. DEVEL'OPMEBNT ARcjtrr,-tc1VRAL Snl(IPZ EXHIBIT 7 LI -:7 17og) ------------- . 1:23.4 PC J /* rt 1L= A;zcDAVID I. s PL -dn? .CTIIXk1 41. shill Or brx pw Iw v � 1 v Wo 00 XOM t"q b U-S -&am City of Southlake, Texas MEMORANDUM October 10, 1996 TO: Mayor and City Councilmembers Planning and Zoning Commissioners Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Greg Last, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Tree Preservation Presentation given to Texas APA Conference Attached for your reference is a copy of a "Comparison and Analysis of Tree Preservation Ordinances" which I presented to the state conference of the American Planning Association in San Antonio last week. I hope that you find it useful. Please contact me if you have any questions. GL/gl enc. "Comparison and Analysis of Tree Preservation Ordinances" dated 10/3/96 L:\WP-FILES\PROJECTS\PRESENT\TREE\CEH-MEM A Comparison and Analysis Of Tree Preservation Ordinances f American Planning Association Texas Chapter - Annual Meeting San Antonio, Tx - October 3, 1996 PROCEDURES FOR ORDINANCE DEVELOPMENT I. DETERMINE POLICY DIRECTION REGARDING EXTENT OF REGULATION A. Possibly in work session "kick-off' with Commission & Council II. RESEARCH AND PREPARE COMPREHENSIVE DRAFT A. Staff to prepare draft with optional wordings for critical sections III. REVISE DRAFTS AS NEEDED A. Per recommendations of P&Z or citizen committee IV. HOLD PUBLIC HEARING A. Notify residential and commercial developers, homebuilders, utility companies V. REVISE AS NEEDED A. Evaluate input from public hearing. VI. HOLD JOINT WORK SESSION WITH P&Z AND CITY COUNCIL A. Discuss research involved, evolution of drafts, input from public hearing VII. CITY COUNCIL ADOPTION VIII. NOTIFY ALL PARTIES IMPACTED A. Hold meeting to discuss implementation aspects B. Include all staff involved in enforcement C. Hold annual meetings reinforcing regulation and resolving issues that have arisen previously. D. Develop short summary to be handed out with building permit information packets. Comparison and Analysis of Tree Preservation ordinances - G. Last - APA Texas Chapter Meeting - October 3, 1996 Page I of 13 POLICY DECISIONS REGARDING EXTENT OF REGULATION Note: Each progressive level includes the regulation noted in the lower level. SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES LEVEL I: a. Does not regulate homeowners residential lots b. Prohibits clear -cutting of land for residential developments LEVEL H: a. Does not regulate homeowners residential lots b. Regulates residential subdivision development but allows removal of trees within ROW and easements sufficient to install improvements, after final plat has been approved c. Builders may not remove trees until after building permit is issued and then may only remove those necessary to build the home, drive, walks, pool, etc. LEVEL III: a. Individual homeowners must request permit to remove trees on their lot b. Location of streets and easements shown on a plat or other exhibit may be revised by City in order to save trees LEVEL IV: a. Locations of houses on individual lots may require relocation to save trees b. Tree replacements required for removal of trees in ROW or easements (4w, COMMERCIAL / OFFICE / INDUSTRIAL / MULTI-FAMIL Y & MUNICIPAL PROPERTIES LEVEL I: a. Prohibits clear -cutting of trees b. Regulates municipal projects LEVEL II: a. Regulates developments other than single-family b. Allows tree removal for site improvements (bldg, parking, etc) after a building permit is issued c. Mitigation (tree replacement or fund contribution) may be required in some situations LEVEL HE a. Requires reconfiguration of parking to save trees b. Requires replacement trees or fund contributions for mitigation of tree removal c. Regulation impacts franchise utility locations or maintenance LEVEL IV: a. Requires revision to building location to save trees b. Location of water and sewer services impacted by ordinance OTHER POLICY DECISIONS 1. Size of protected tree. 2. Whether or not to differentiate between types of trees to be protected. Comparison and Analysis of Tree Preservation Ordinances - G. Last - APA Texas Chapter Meeting - October 3, 1996 Page 2 of 13 TYPICAL ORDINANCE STRUCTURE I. INTRODUCTORY LEGAL II. DEFINITIONS III. APPLICABILITY A. Agricultural B. Residential Homeowner C. Residential Developments D. Commercial Developments E. Municipal Projects F. Franchise or Other Utilities IV. PROHIBITED ACTIVITIES V. ADMINISTRATION & ENFORCEMENT A. Exemptions VI. B. Existing Conditions VIOLATIONS ,,. VII. LEGAL BOILERPLATE VIII. APPENDICES A. Graphic Exhibits B. Tree Lists Comparison and Analysis of Tree Preservation Ordinances - G. Last - APA Texas Chapter Meeting - October 3, 1996 Page 3 of 13 (411W Tree Exhibit 0 Critical Root Zone: The area of undisturbed soil around a tree defined by a concentric circle with the radius equal to the distance from the trunk to the outermost portion of the dripline. Drip Line: A vertical line run from the outermost portion of the canopy of a tree and extending to the ground. Comparison and Analysis of Tree Preservation Ordinances - G. Last - APA Texas Chapter Meeting - October 3, 1996 Page 4 of 13 7/�b�9195 3d/S II a a �fi Lu W WIMM } t Y � rib>a1�5 gain �` � �,o awe X1tiS_layd L.w LO A an r J/7IC ���7b9135 ddiS—� J it r ri w fv � Le LJ tAj Comparison and Analysis of Tree Preservation Ordinances - G. Last - APA Texas Chapter Meeting - October 3, 1996 Page 5 of 13 Q Sla t W October 3, 1996 ': a� " yin• __..._ ...- . ..�. ,�;;. .....F ., �.. -. < :-�sF�r,,e F.; M OTHERS COMPARISONAND ANALYSIS OF W U TREE PRESERVATION Q ORDINANCES °a• 0 American Planning Association z a s p, a f 2 ¢ Z Texas Chapter - Annual Meeting FO ^ a 5 'RW AO U C7 OU w San Antonio, Texas w C^y a a .¢1 O � O a z M ar Prepared by Greg Last A I W O a 0. 0 0 � a O cn 3 Oco Q Q W o U U U A k a O W a O ��tF Ht� A 0 APPLICABILITY Master Legend: M=Mandatory, R=Recommended A=Administrator s Decision, See Ordinance•, HOMEOWNERS AGRICULTURAL USES MUNICIPAL PROJECTS • COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . UTILITY COMPANIES R.O.W. / EASEMENTS AXv • MISCELLANEOUS .Legend: ` F=Freesfanding O;d ,{dscgpepdgthg Li1„�Re LOCATION OF REGULATION Z U F Z L F Z U L U U U Z F U F F 0 Z U U j U F F U PROTECTED TREE SIZE 8 19 3 10 • 3 3 1 8 10 4 6 3 1 3 15 8 6 3 8 6 6 12 30 j l TREE TYPES DIFFERENTIATED TREE REPLACEMENT A M A A M M A M RESTRICTS DESIGN / LAYOUT tEE REPLACEMENT FUND RUNING STANDARDS PLANTING LIMITATIONS GRAPHICS INCLUDED ADMINISTRATION = Legend: I= SURVEY / EXHIBIT REQUIRED PERMIT APPROVAL APPEAL APPROVAL DEDICATED ENFORCER PROHIBITER AOT1��ITIES MATERIAL STORAGE LIQUID DISPOSAL TREE ATTACHMENTS VEHICLE PARKING CUT / FILL LIMIT PAVING LIMITS iC�t, R Packs, W—Public Woes E S E E S E E• P T Z I I R • R Z Z B T P• A A ■MMNMMMO■aa■aMMMMMa■a ■aa1 ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ ■■■■■■,■MM' ����■MM■MMMMM■ ■mmomm"■■m1 Immmmmmmmmmmmommmommo,■mmi ■mmomm■as■■s■■■■SS■■S ■■ME 1 ©MM■■©■©M■© ■�■■■�©©■■,■©■© :.. • , ■■Boom■■■■■■■m■■■© ■©©o WING OF TREES WrAINING WALLS / AM WELLS Comparison and Analysis of Tree Preservation Ordinances - G. Last - APA Texas Chapter Meeting - October 3, 1996 Page 6 of 13 (W DESCRIPTION OF CRITERIA USED IN COMPARISON MATRIX CRITERIA Homeowners The ordinance regulates the removal of protected trees by homeowners on their residential lot. Agricultural Uses The ordinance regulates the removal of protected trees within farming or agricultural uses as needed for the continuation of the agricultural use. Municipal Projects The ordinance regulates the removal of protected trees by municipalities in order to construct public improvements such as streets and utilities. Commercial Development The ordinance regulates the removal of protected trees within commercial developments. Residential Development The ordinance regulates the removal of protected trees within residential subdivision development Utility Companies The ordinance regulates the removal of protected trees by the utility companies. R.O.W. / Easements The ordinance regulates removal of protected trees within R.O.W. or utility/drainage easements. Location of Re Regulation The ordinance is a freestandin ordinance located within a Zoning Ordinance Z g g iF), g (), Landscape Ordinance (L) or Unified Code (Ll). Protected Tree Size Shows the diameter (in inches) of the tree protected by the ordinance. Tree Types Differentiated The type of protected tree is differentiated based on the perceived quality of the tree. Tree Replacement The planting of replacement trees is mandatory (IVI), recommended (R), or subject to the administrator's decision (A) as a condition for removal of a protected tree. Restricts Design / Layout The requirements of the ordinance restrict the location of buildings, parking or other planned improvements. Tree Replacement Fund The ordinance provides for a tree or reforestation type fund which is mandatory (M), recommended (R) or subject to the administrator's decision (A) as a condition for removal of a protected tree. Pruning Standards The ordinance regulates the pruning of protected trees. Planting Limitations The ordinance regulates the planting of trees within the city. (Above and beyond sight triangle type restrictions.) Graphics Included The ordinance includes graphic exhibits which aid in the understanding of the ordinance. Comparison and Analysis of Tree Preservation ordinances - G. Last - APA Texas Chapter Meeting - October 3, 1996 Page 7 of 13 Survey / Exhibit Required A Survey (S) or Exhibit (E) is required with a tree removal permit request. Per P the Permit Approval The permit approval 1s the responsibility of Budding Inspections (I), Planning ( ), P/Z Commission (Z), Council (C), Public Works (W), Parks & Rec (R), or a Tree Board (T). Appeal Approval The final appeal authority is a Tree Board (T), P/Z Commission (Z) or Council (C). Dedicated Enforcer The City has an Arborist/Urban Forester (A), Landscape Architect (L), or other professional dedicated to the administration and enforcement of the ordinance. Removal w/o Permit The ordinance prohibits the removal of a protected tree without the approval of a permit. Material Storage The ordinance prohibits storing material such as lumber, brick, trash, mortar, etc. within the critical root zone (CRZ) of a protected tree. Liquid Disposal The ordinance prohibits the disposal of liquids such as paint, oil, cement, etc. within the critical root zone (CRZ) of a protected tree. Tree Attachments The ordinance prohibits attaching signs, wires, etc. to a protected tree. Vehicle Parking The ordinance prohibits the parking of vehicles or construction equipment within the critical root zone (CRZ) of a protected tree. Cut / Fill Limit The depth of cut and/or fill in inches prohibited by the ordinance within the critical root zone (CRZ) of a protected tree. Paving Limits The ordinance prohibits the placement of paving within the critical root zone (CRZ) of a protected tree such that the livelihood of the tree would be jeopardized. Tree Flagging The flagging of protected trees is mandatory (M), recommended (R) or subject to the administrator's decision (A). Boring of Utilities Boring under protected trees is mandatory (M), recommended (R) or subject to the administrator's decision (A). Fencing of Trees The fencing of protected trees is mandatory (M), recommended (R), or subject to the administrator's decision (A). Retaining Walls Retaining walls around protected trees are mandatory (M), recommended (R), or subject to the administrator's decision (A). Air Wells Air wells encompassing the limits of the critical root zone (CRZ) of a protected tree are mandatory (MI), recommended (R), or subject to the administrator's decision (A)., Bark Protection Surrounding the tree with boards banded with wire is mandatory (Ml), recommended Qe (R), or subject to the administrator's decision (A). Comparison and Analysis of Tree Preservation Ordinances - G. Last - APA Texas Chapter Meeting - October 3, 1996 Page 8 of 13 ( GENERAL OBSERVATIONS POTENTIAL PROBLEM AREAS: 1. Most ordinances do not address the interaction of required tree replacements and other required tree plantings. Are the replacements above and beyond the trees required to meet a landscape ordinance? Where an ordinance requires mandatory replacement tree plantings for every tree removed, for some lots this could definitely require considerable over planting, particularly on small wooded lots. 2. Some ordinances do not define a violation and fines for a violation. Some also define a violation as a day. It would be better to define each protected tree removed as a separate violation, otherwise all trees could be removed in one day and only one violation could be cited. LANGUAGE & TERMINOLOGY INTENT: Some ordinances say `Existing trees to be preserved" must meet certain requirements. This does not say the trees must be preserved, rather if the applicant chooses to save them, they must meet the requirements. 2. Some ordinances appear to exempt all trees in a "residential setback envelope" which is defined as the area between the front and rear setback. Technically this means that the only trees protected are those between the front property line and the front setback, and between the rear property line and the rear setback. 3. Some ordinances allow the developer to remove trees within the "buildable area" and define this as all areas inside the required yard areas. This does not limit tree removal to only the areas needed to build the permitted project if that is the intent. GOOD IDEAS: Provide authority to ZBA to grant exceptions to parking requirements due to the applicant's desire to save a protected tree. 2. Allow administrators flexibility. 3. Provide a "cap" on the maximum replacement trees based on the size of the lot (Houston). 1. One ordinance required submittal to. the Planning Director on forms prepared by the Public Works Department and only after a review by the Parks Department could the Planning and Zoning Commission approve the tree permit (with any appeals to be reviewed by City Council). Comparison and Analysis of Tree Preservation Ordinances - G. Last - APA Texas Chapter Meeting - October 3, 1996 Page 9 of 13 SUMMARY OF CONTACTS ARBOR DAY FOUNDATION CEDAR HILL FAIRVIEW Phone: (402) 474-5655 Johnny Kendrow Scott Albert Building Official City Administrator ARLINGTON P.O. Box 96 P.O. Box 551 Lee Ann Layne Cedar Hill, TX 75104 McKinney, TX 75069 City Arborist Phone: (972) 291-5106 Phone: (214) 562-0522 City of Arlington Fax: (972) 291-5107 Fax: (214) 548-0268 P.O. Box 231 Arlington, TX. 76010 COLLEYVH LE FLOWER MOUND Phone: (817) 459-6520 Doug Henderson Jerry Sylo Fax: (817) 459-6669 Com. Development Director Com. Development Director City of Colleyville City of Flower Mound ATLANTA 5400 Bransford Road 2121 Cross Timbers Road Susan Newell Colleyville, TX 76034 Flower Mound, TX 75028 City Arborist Phone: (817) 577-7587 Phone: (972) 539-6006 City of Atlanta Fax: (817) 577-7564 Fax: (972) 539-3392 55 Trinity Ave., SW Suite 3900 COPPELL FULTON COUNTY. GA Atlanta, GA 30335-0309 Isabelle Moro Gene Callaway Phone: (404) 658-6874 Planning and Zoning Coordinator 141 Pryor Street Fax: (404) 658-6979 City of Coppell Atlanta, GA 30303 AUSTIN 255 Parkway Blvd Coppell, TX 75019 Phone: (404) 730-7531 Fax: (404) 730-6325 Patrick Murphy Phone: (972) 304-3677 Environmental Program Mgr. Fax: (972) 304-3570 GARLAND P.O. Box 1088 Claude Thompson Austin, TX 78767 DALLAS 800 Main Street Phone: (512) 499-2821 Kassandra McLaughlin Garland, TX 75040 Fax: (512) 499-2709 Chief Arborist Phone: (972) 205-2448 1500 Marilla Street Fax: (972) 205-2474 BEDFORD RM 5B-North Danny Moss Dallas, TX 75201 GIBBSBORO, N.J. Building Official Phone: (972) 948-4482 Brian Slough City of Bedford Fax: (972) 670-5755 Borough of Gibbsboro 2000 Forest Ridge Drive 49 Kirkwood Road Bedford, TX 76021 DENTON Gibbsboro, New Jersey 08026 Phone: (817) 952-2140 G. Owen Yost Phone: (609) 883-6655 Fax: (817) 952-2210 Urban Planner Fax: (609) 782-8694 City of Denton BOERNE 221 Elm GRAPEVINE Ed Beasley Denton, TX 76201 Marcy Ratcliff Building Official Phone: (817) 566-8357 Planner City of Boerne Fax: (817) 383-7707 City of Grapevine P.O. Box 1677 P. O. Box 95104 Boerne, TX 78006-1677 Grapevine, TX 76099 Phone: (210) 249-9511 Phone: (817) 481-0377 Fax: (210) 249-9264 Fax: (817) 424-0545 Comparison and Analysis of Tree Preservation Ordinances - G. Last - APA Texas Chapter Meeting - October 3, 1996 Page 10 of 13 HIGHLAND PARK Ronnie Brown TEXAS FOREST SERVICE Mark Peterson Parks Director Regional Urban Forester 4700 Drexel Drive Texas Forest Service Highland Park, TX 75205 San Antonio Region Phone: (214) 559-9356 202 E. Nueva Fax: (214) 559-9335 San Antonio, TX 78204 Phone: (210) 223-9963 HOUSTON Fax: (210) 207-4276 Charles Darlek P.O. Box 1562 TEXAS FOREST SERVICE Houston, TX 77251-1562 Larry Schaapveld Phone: (713) 754-0062 Urban Forester Fax: (713) 754-9623 Texas Forest Service Fort Worth Region KELLER 4200 South Freeway Nika Zolghadri Suite 2200 Com. Development Director Fort Worth, TX 76115-1499 City of Keller Phone: (817) 926-8203 158 S. Main Street Fax: (817) 871-5724 Keller, TX 76248 Phone: (817) 431-1519 THE WOODLANDS Fax: (817) 431-5867 Jim Wendt 2201 Timberloch Place SOUTHLAKE The Woodlands, TX 77380 Greg Last Phone: (713) 377-6481 Com. Development Director Fax: (713) 377-6363 City of Southlake 1 667 N. Carroll Ave. TAMPA, FLORIDA Southlake, TX 76092 Steve Graham Phone: (817) 481-5581 Ext. 744 City Arborist Fax: (817) 488-9370 Parks Department 7525 North Blvd. HAROLDSPIEGEL-ARBORIST Tampa, FL 33604 660 Preston Forest Center Phone: (813) 931-2639 Suite 137 Fax: (813) 931-2120 Dallas, TX 75230 Phone: (214) 956-9779 TROPHY CLUB Fax: (214) 956-7787 Pauline Shaw P & Z Administrator 100 Municipal Drive Trophy Club, TX 76262 Phone: (817) 430-1911 x171 Fax: (817) 491-4133 X WESTLAKE Scot Bradley Mayor 5215 N. O'Connor Blvd. #300 Irving, TX 75039 Phone: (214) 869-1105 Fax: (214) 869-0803 WEST UNIVERSITY PLACE Neslihan Tesno Urban Forester Dept. of Public Works 3800 University Blvd. Houston, TX 77005 Phone: (713) 662-5893 Fax: (713)662-5804 Comparison and Analysis of Tree Preservation Ordinances - G. Last - APA Texas Chapter Meeting - October 3, 1996 Page 11 of 13 X 24 Common Name Pecan Cedar Elm Shumard Red Oak Texas Red Oak Live Oak Bur Oak Post Oak Black Jack Oak Lacebark Elm Chinese Pistache Sweetgum Austrian Pine Chinquapin Oak Southern Magnolia Bald Cypress Caddo Maple Texas Hickory Common Name Cottonwood Mesquite American Elm Slash Pine Honeylocust Japanese Black Pine Western Soapberry Red Cedar Deodar Cedar DIFFERENTIATION OF TREE TYPES QUALITY TREES Botanical Name Carya illinoensis Ulmus crassifolia Quercus shumardii Quercus texana Quercus virginiana Quercus macrocarpa Quercus stellata Quercus marilandica Ulmus parvifolia Pistacia chinensis Liquidambar styraciflua Pinus nigra Quercus muhlenbergii Magnolia grandiflora Taxodium distichum Acer barbatum 'Caddo' Carya texana MARGINAL TREES Botanical Name Populus deltoides Prosopis glandulosa Ulmus americana Pinus elliotti Gleditsia triacanthos Pinus thunbergii Sapindus drummondii Juniperus virginiana Cedrus deodara Identification Notes Pecan fruit, compound leaves Deciduous, 1"-21, dark green leaves Deep pointed lobes in leaves Vertical multi -trunk shape 1 n" dark green pointed leaves Large acorn, leaf border at end Deep lobes, rounded tip on leaf Leathery 3"-7" leaf, no lobes Small dark serrated green leaves 3" sickle leaflets, fall color Star shaped leaf Two needles Oblong 4"-6" serrated leaf Large evergreen Leaf, white flower Feather -like foliage, fall color Five -lobed leaf Five leaflets, 1"-2" nut Identification Notes Deep fissures in bark, heart leaf Lacy open foliage, 10" bean fruit 'V, shaped main branching Tall cylindrical shape Lacy foliage, thornless variety Twisted growth, dark green needles 18" compound leaf, %I' clear fruit Native, pyramidal shape Large pyramidal evergreen OTHER TREES OF CONCERN Although the following trees do not typically obtain the protected 8" size, the City would like to recommend that protective care also be considered for these trees: Common Name Redbud Mexican Plum Possumhaw Holly Golden Raintree Yaupon Holly Cherry Laurel 1 Cercis canadensis Prunis mexicana Ilex decidua Koelrutaria paniculata Ilex vomitoria Prunus caroliniana Identification Notes Purple/white flower in spring White flower, exfoliating bark Showy orange/red fruit, deciduous Yellow flower, panicled fruit Evergreen, light bark, red fruit Glossy evergreen foliage, shrubby Comparison and Analysis of Tree Preservation Ordinances - G. Last - APA Texas Chapter Meeting - October 3, 1996 Page 12 of 13 31 LANDSCAPE ADMINISTRATOR RESPONSIBILITIES 40% - LANDSCAPE PLAN REVIEW a. Review concept plans and site plans for adequate landscape areas and bufferyards prior to review by P&Z or Council b. Review all landscape plans prior to issuance of building permit 30% -TREE PRESERVATION ISSUES a. Review all tree removal permit requests b. Perform on -site inspections 1. Verify dead trees for removal 2. Inspect marginal trees to determine feasibility of preserving trees 3. Verify adequacy of tree protection during construction c. Investigate citizen complaints d. Present any appeals to the P&Z or Tree Board e. Calculate the cost of removed trees and collect payments for tree fund 15% -GENERAL ADMINISTRATION a. Meet with developers, builders and homeowners regarding the tree preservation ordinance and landscape ordinance b. Assist the Parks department with horticultural projects c. Assist Keep City Beautiful with landscape projects d. Assist Public Works with tree or landscape related problems on their projects e. Prepare grant requests for streetscape or similar projects 10% - LANDSCAPE INSTALLATION INSPECTION a. Inspect the installation of all landscape projects for conformance with approved landscape plans b. Coordinate installation and contract management of any streetscape projects 5% - LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE VERIFICATION a. Inspect all landscape projects within the one-year warranty required for commercial projects and write letters to tenants requiring replacement of any dead plants QUALIFICATIONS: Following are qualifications that should be considered for this position: Bachelors degree in Horticulture, Landscape Architecture or Urban Forestry Knowledge of native and adapted plants Knowledge of construction techniques and procedures Ability to review construction plans and specifications Comparison and Analysis of Tree Preservation Ordinances - G. Last - APA Texas Chapter Meeting - October 3, 1996 Page 13 of 13 City of Southlake, Texas MEMORANDUM October 10, 1996 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Billy Campbell, Director of Public Safety SUBJECT: Report of Visit to Charlotte Motor Speedway Attached for your review is a memo from Gary Gregg, Deputy Director of Police Services, on his visit to Charlotte Motor Speedway which is owned by Bruton Smith, also the owner of the soon to be completed Texas Motor Speedway. The visit was made to gain insight into expected traffic flow and congestion problems associated with these large events, and to review other situations that have the potential to occur. Deputy Director Gregg visited with representatives from the race track, the North Carolina State Highway Patrol, the North Carolina Department of Transportation and with representatives from other law enforcement agencies, and he has detailed his observations for our review. Attachment City of Southlake, Texas October 10, 1996 TO: Billy Campbell, Director of Public Safety FROM: Gary Gregg, Deputy Director of Police Services SUBJECT: Report of Visit to Charlotte Motor Speedway On October 4th, 5th, and 6th of this month I was able to attend two races at Charlotte Motor Speedway. The Busch Race was on Saturday and the UAWGM 500 NASCAR race was on Sunday. When we arrived on Friday we first located Mr. Tummy Correll, the Chief of Security of the Charlotte Motor Speedway: Mr. Correll gave us a tour of the grounds and gave us an overview of the infrastructure of the raceway and the surrounding road and track operations. The race operations and preparation are split between three different agencies, the North Carolina Department of Transportation, the North Carolina State Highway Patrol and the Charlotte Motor Speedway security personnel. The North Carolina Department of Transportation has a number of personnel on site, access to barrels, in excess of 1800 traffic cones, and numerous vehicles. They also have the District Engineer on site, along with appropriate drawings and schematics for diverting and placing the roadway traffic. An additional advantage to having the Engineer on site is similar to our City Ordinance in that any sign that is posted or any routing that is done by the Engineer is automatically deemed to be legal. The DOT works very closely with the North Carolina State Highway Patrol and although the DOT has a small officelcommand post on the scene, the Engineer is generally in the area of the Highway Patrol command post or, in most instances, on the inside getting information and talking with Highway Patrol personnel. The North Carolina Highway Patrol has jurisdiction and responsibility for all traffic vehicular operations off of the race track proper. Roads feeding the race track include a divided two lane roadway just in front of the race track itself, access within two miles to an interstate highway, and within a couple of miles in the opposite direction, access to another major U.S. highway. The Highway Patrol has been coordinating and directing the traffic function at the Charlotte Motor Speedway in excess of ten years and they have gathered a great amount of expertise in doing so. The third component of the race operations consists of the Charlotte Motor Speedway security personnel. There are about 300 personnel who actually work on race day. The normal number, I'm sure, is quite small during the routine day -today operations. The Charlotte Motor Speedway security personnel do not try to participate in directing traffic or any function other than those specifically on the Speedway grounds, and they don't normally get involved in any of the off grounds activities. There are some other agencies that have a presence in the Highway Patrol command post but do not directly interface with the Highway Patrol. The City of Concord, North Carolina is about seven miles from the race track. It is a town of approximately 35,000 with a Police Department of approximately 100 and they place a contingent of Police Officers actually on the ground. They will normally assist the Charlotte Motor Speedway personnel and make any physical arrests that need to be made. In Report of Visit to Charlotte Motor Speedway October 10, 1996 Page 2 addition to the Concord Police contingent, there is the usual plethora of related state law enforcement agencies which includes the North Carolina State Bureau of Investigation and the Alcohol Law Enforcement section. We were able to view the operations from both the ground and the air and it became apparent that there are very distinct differences between the Busch and NASCAR races. The Busch race normally occurs on a Saturday and it appears to be directed more towards a family event. The traffic tends to build slower, it is a less attended race than the NASCAR race, and it is more family oriented. The crowds will begin to taper off and, in fact, traffic for both races drops to an almost standstill about an hour or 45 minutes before the actual start of the race. At the end of the Busch race a large portion of the crowd, perhaps 70% or 80%, made no immediate effort to leave as the NASCAR drivers are then allowed to resume the track and numbers of them will make final attempts before the next day's race. I believe they are allotted a certain number of laps (30 laps) and they access the track for practice, so there is not an immediate push or release of traffic from the Busch race because the people tend to stay around to watch those cars finish their practice laps. In contrast to the Busch race is the actual NASCAR race itself. This, obviously, is a more attended race and the traffic begins to build much earlier in the morning. Again, this race has the same phenomenon of peaking about one hour before race time in which there is little or no traffic in the area at all. There seems to be less of a family atmosphere at the NASCAR race. The crowds are different and more diverse, probably due to the difference in the ticket prices. Unlike the Busch race, some people started leaving ten to twenty laps prior to the end of the NASCAR race and at the end of the race at the checkered flag, an almost wall of humanity appeared outside the stadium. For approximately 45 minutes it was impossible for anyone to move on any of the roadways due to the mass of humanity moving across the roadways to the outer contained parking lots. The NASCAR race ended at Charlotte at approximately 4:30 p.m. and we remained to watch the final preparations of traffic and the flow of the traffic outbound. One thing that would be important to note is that at about 7:15 p.m., while we were leaving, there was still a significant amount of traffic moving very slowly. I made a number of observations, particularly while at the track, and perhaps the first one that I had not considered was the fact -that the traffic activity at the beginning of the race until almost the end of the race actually comes almost to a halt. This indicates to me that we will have to provide some mechanism for either retrieving officers from the field or providing some place for them to be able to rest and relax until the traffic begins the outbound flow. I noticed also that the race track had worked with the North Carolina Highway Patrol and furnishes to the Highway Patrol all the necessary items for the troopers to be able to survive on the side of the road. Because some of these troopers are up to eight or nine miles away from the race track and are sometimes in relatively secluded areas, they are also allotted four drinks per officer per day, along with snacks and the other items. Lieutenant Barbee, of the North Carolina Highway Patrol, has about ten years of experience working with this particular race at Charlotte and I visited with him for quite some period of time and watched Report of Visit to Charlotte Motor Speedway October 10, 1996 Page 3 the operations as he deployed them on the ground. He pointed out to me that as the races begin to run in the night time hours, they had found that the use of flares with the overhead lights on cars and the red safety cones on the flashlights were sometimes too overly visually distracting to motorists and cause the motorist to become confused about the instructions the officers were giving. As a result, they have negotiated with the race track for them to provide power plants and light towers at all intersections and locations where officers are directing traffic. The officers, obviously, still use reflective vests and cones, but an abnormal number of flares or other such things are not as necessary because the intersections are very well lit. Lieutenant Barbee also pointed out to me that in his experience in watching the traffic flow, especially inbound traffic, in his opinion drivers should be given absolutely no reason to stop. He was very explicit about this, especially in the area of people setting up along side the road to scalp tickets. They have an ordinance in North Carolina that states if you sell tickets, anything $3.00 over face value is scalping. In fact, we visited with a number of people in the area and he immediately had them remove signs and then called the other law enforcement authorities in to deal with the ticket sellers. He also indicated to me that we should be prepared to deal with those issues of anyone attempting to set up to do any kind of peddling such as "closest T-Shirts five miles from the track." Generally, there is going to be counterfeiting or people who are operating outside the area of licensed merchandise, and vehicles will divert from the roadway to the medium or to lots and this disrupts the general traffic flow. I didn't have an opportunity to visit with Mr. Gossage or any of the other officials of the race track, I however, I' did have a chance to talk with Wes Harris who is the Executive Vice President of Operations for the Speedway Motor Sports who will actually put on the race here in Texas. I visited with Mr. Harris and pointed out to him that there were obviously a number of financial things that they had done for the North Carolina Highway Patrol in regards to the light towers at the intersections and the supplies and drinks and snacks and things for the officers that actually have to work the traffic. In addition, the obvious signage that will have to be placed on the roadway, cones, and other things as deemed necessary to contraflow the traffic. Mr. Harris told me he felt that it was inappropriate for him to comment about any particular financial matters because he didn't know what Mr. Gossage had already committed to. It was his hope that the Texas Department of Transportation would be doing the signage and cones and the contraflowing on the roadway, but he said that he felt sure that in the absence of DOT taking a stand, the speedway would step in with something to help the situation run better. I would suggest that while we are making the actual -preparations for handling the race traffic itself, that perhaps the City Attorneys go back and review our peddling and soliciting ordinances and, if possible and if they consider it necessary, we may need to initiate some sort of ticket scalping ordinance in order to deter those types of activities from beginning. My final question related to the number of intoxicated persons that are coming out of the race track. I asked how many impaired drivers would come out of a crowd of 150,000 and Mr. Correll looked at me and said, about 75,000. Generally, what the speedway has been willing to do in the longer (especially night time) races where the crowd has a longer time to stay and drink, is to curtail the sale Lov of alcohol. In speaking with Lieutenant Barbee of the North Carolina Highway Patrol, he stated that IQ G Report of Visit to Charlotte Motor Speedway October 10, 1996 Page 4 when drinking initially became a problem, the Highway Patrol moved in with a very aggressive program. Troopers walked the roadways from car to car in the very slow traffic and when they encountered inebriated drivers, they would give field sobriety testing and, of course, make an arrest. After several years of very vigorous enforcement, the public becomes educated, the track cooperates with less beer sales, and people attending the race begin to seek alternative drivers. Again, in that situation, the state beefs up their facilities and has extra judges standing by in order to be able to accommodate the number of arrests that are being made at that point in time. It was also very apparent to me that weather is a direct factor on the number of intoxicated persons that officers will encounter. Obviously, the hotter the weather and the longer the race, the more alcohol will be consumed and the greater the number of people we will encounter. A few conceptions that we had before we went to the race that we did not find to be true were that there are very few accidents because the traffic is not moving fast enough to cause much of anything at all. Tow trucks are essential. The Highway Patrol will tow cars off the roadway and the right of way very quickly in order to keep the traffic flowing. They will not allow the shoulders of the road to become blocked, as they tend to utilize the shoulders for emergency vehicles. I realize this has been rather lengthy, but I wanted to give you as concise a picture as possible of the race operations as we had viewed them. I am available if you have any questions. GG/bls t� CD '00 w Yo g c.e �,orfDo .�'�. c--o,»,°' °•c ypo �' �' 3. A p. O j "c�u � J' ate' � y so � y �•x t A r' � C v� m � Z -, O ^ fD Cf9 fD C v, -n O a D aA^o Y A = C EA A y Cy �n O ti b � N � Q..+, C � 69 •i � �_ ii. r �r A r�r �D rA o d 0 ^ l9 iD A c, vo p. v,W CD o CD CD p tD :r O caD O O O a 0 0 m O° "o Qy O + y H S y+'O p _ _ a C y C cy A t cD w �, `e v' -, O ? CD 0 CD O in ti L3 CD A� C7 p i O m C7 O 7 G O A~• w �° t O y °' < 64 to � `� in O» H PD (9 .Ax•. PD .A» ^ 'ti p n> pp > � O � -~i A CD CD'V iD`� ZS 69C y a�, 82 Q O c�D A ice! y y y =r O OAQ .A. 0A. Chi +� O CD y S `� vA CD (D G. qr 0'O .`�. y O A+ `n O7 Oi y ~ y • `C = vi ER n -0 C. fD �r r1�� CD ^" A X O. O p•� NANjol CC`D A �o.CD Cr 3 c �„n• O � ••t � y �' C.. O � C � •� S n �. ai � < Qq • -Ci C� O � � cD p p C v cm a p d CD D A A S S o0 ■ 4 ■ C. y y y QQ 69 W 69 S b9 :Old _ 'y "' y• V r• n ""•p N'JO A ry C 9 ig A BCD O"o O „•v O n _ y x S O xv 7 7 NEWS CLIPPLNG II Source: S D UA-h VCA rL-Z J o u r n a l i Date: q" a 1_ qb 11 Look Who's Forty ! The City of Southlake will cel- ebrate its 40th birthday with fes- tivities in Bicentennial Park, September 29 beginning at 1pm. A children's parade will kick off the celebration near the Commu- nity Center, and party games will be underway by 1:30pm. A golf croquet mini -tournament is sched- uled, and other activities include a kids' bounce house, a face painter, a clown, Lake Cities Community Band, and the third annual Rocket Launch, which will take place from 24 2-4pm. Long-time residents are encour- aged to bring your Southlake memorabilia to share with others beneath the pavilion, and Mayor Rick Stacy will be on hand to present a brief history of the city and introductions to some of its oldest residents. Finally, a birthday cake will be shared to celebrate Southlake's 40 years ... and counting. For more information, contact the city at 481-5581, ext. 819. T NEWS CLIPPING 11 Source: 50 LA+V l LA ICR J O u Y Y) Ci I I Date: R- a]- Ci (o I Voters To Decide Bond Issue by Terry Fox Voters will go to the polls Sat- irday to decide the district's pro- 1 )osed $44 million bond election, i Aich would fund a new school, purchase land, expand core facili- ties and other projects. Voting will take place in the Johnson Elemen- tary cafeteria from 7am-7pm, Sat- urday, September 28. The adoption of the *proposal, CISD Finance Director Karen House says, would increase the amount of taxes paid on a $200,000 home by a maximum of $57 by 1998, another $57 by 1999, and a final $2.28 by the year 2000. In other words, the effective increase over current taxes on a $200,000 home would be a maximum of $116.40 by the year 2000. House explains that the finance committee is "confident" that these increases would be minimal, if not zero, due to the increased tax valu- ations submitted by the county, as well as to the increased efficiency of the district. House added, "We are confident that we can keep the tax rate the same for the next three years. - The current tax rate of $1.74 was set this summer, after the dis- trict was faced with an increase in debt service. Additionally, House explained at that time, the district CISD Bond Election Voting for the $44 million bond package proposed by the CISD will take place in the Johnson Elementary cafeteria from 7am- 7pm Saturday, September 28. Outline Of Bond Uses New school (7th-9th).... $27,570,000 Land for 4 future sites ..... $4,910,000 Expand CHS core facilities ....................$4,730,000 Districtwide Technology improvements .......... $2,250,000 Major maintenance ......... $2,320,000 Storage and office support facility ......... $1,600,000 Bus storage facility .............$620,000 wished to set a tax rate that would prepare the district for the contin- ued projected growth in enroll- ment. The new proposal would allow the district to build a junior high school (grades 7 through 9), that would be completed in 1998 and cost approximately $27.5 million. Also, expansion of core facilities at Carroll High,would be under- taken, at an approx. cost of $4.7 million. Land for four future school sites (2 elementaries, an in- termediate, and a middle school) would be purchased for approx. $4.9 million. Additionally, funds would be allocated for maintenance and sup- port facilities for the district, in- cluding: land for bus storage ($620,000), a warehouse and main= tenance facility ($1.6 million), maintenance projects (approx. $2.3 million), and technology improve- ments for the district (approx. $2.2 million). The current and future growth in the district, and ways to man- age that growth, have been studied by members of the Academic/Co- curricular committee, Finance committee, and Bond Steering committee. To provide for the.. 9,526 students projected to attend Carroll schools by 2005, according to -officials, the committees studied portable buildings, year-round schooling, half day schedules for elementary schools, and signifi- cantly increased class sizes. The bond proposal is the result of these studies. PI Ik O O N O 8 C a R 0Er C �r O `G 00 0 O '� ►*, At QQ .~�.. o '0i o C9 w o•n O �. '"' �p cD =' O --' 0 O ti7 :h f� O m �1 `U iC1 '". = om g = g ' !-E a c Y � o y ob`< o� �f aE y o �x Oc yCD OQ a. r-oc° tea= ZjX c=D o ��,o =. coOD Z co -0,°•_°• — o CD b =° cOo !,a coo CA CDN a C. T! y O CS N It 9-- ti . ._•. QQ CD QQ .», c. o ao co °' 3 S1 o S "' w m c ° w ' . 8 ' 0 M?.O>2.ON EL�'v ° Oa _ CZ, �'a- G- H'F r. � a= y'fl cD o (� N CA_ a _ • g r ', a G CL S O = (�• W' N0 CO,`• ca a^ nrz O S CD 0 rT C'UO v'4 p'p�awc 'c7� C-p'O CD ^ G ^ N' � Ci G C_A C,O y y G O OQ ~• ^ CD n' a afro 0 '�~y .O 00 ro qQ G O 00 O 0 O CD � CD a RoC . . o K 7" �0Ta < .p � .d 5• ° ;Er�� CO.- p b f7 b _ C7 a S y _ �, cD I.� O Mo.- - a O O O _ _ G � �° g co � O Q' � a ,.» g• << _. C.rr'• � Q �. ^o o w � c g wq OC vb o 7 O� OrY p 0_< Sr R 7C O O G �i � N t7 .� O '-' �' C �Cp = pG� �Su /�� c� 0� C� ,� O O C �' ,,a'• 0,� y OG. fi �i 7� C, fXD 0 i�r IJ �•� rT _ „" "� y 0� �" A� rD b �b aC4 cc) CD \W !3 fD 5 CD CA A [J \W !3 fD 5 CD CA A [J Source: Si -a Y T-e NEWS CLIPPING rn 1_1Y1 Care facility dilemma Date: 01 - a--j —R SOUTHLAKE — In a city that has no apartments and no interest in apart- ments, officials soon may be faced with a delicate decision of whether to allow construction of what resembles apartments for the elderly, staff writer Leslie Hueholt reported. Architects are fine-tuning a proposal for an 80-unit assisted -care facility near the northeast corner of Pey- tonville Avenue and Farm Road 1709. The center is planned by Dallas archi- tectural engineering firm Aguirre Corp. Neighborhood residents question how such a center might affect them, many fearing that it would bring too many people and too much traffic to the intersection. Developers may have an uphill climb getting residents' bless- ing for the center, city officials say. The center, which "won't look any- thing like an apartment," would cater to adults older than 60 who live within a 10-mile radius, said Jake Ussery, zon- ing coordinator for Aguirre Corp. Although Southlake Mayor Rick Stacy said he has concerns about traffic the Aguirre project might cause, he said he recognizes the need for an assisted - care center in Southlake. Representa- tives of Aguirre hope to take the matter to the city Planning and Zoning Com- mission on Oct. 17. NEWS CLIPPING Source: 51- QQY TQ 1 feg Y G YY1 Date: E D I T O R I A L S i Southlake's Day' � = FORTY YEARS AGO, the city of Southlake was born. On Sun- day, the city will celebrate with a great community birthday party at Bicentennial Park. The public is invited. The theme of the party is old Southlake. Although Southlake, officially as a city, only dates back four decades, settlement in the area began 150 years ago. The first known pioneer community was Dove, named after the historic Lonesome Dove Baptist Church. At the party, tents and chairs will be set up for old friends and newcomers to swap stories and show pictures about Southlake. There's also a contest for the oldest resident and the resident who has lived in the area the longest. In keeping with the theme of the party, we recently researched the city archives for some hints about old Southlake. The minutes from one of the earliest City Council meetings shows the first reported police incident in city history. From the Dec. 3, 1956 meeting: "The mayor called for the Town Marshall's report. Mr. Anderson, the Marshall, stated that he _had one call regarding trouble with a neighbor's dog, and that the situation had been amicably settled." The phrase "amicably settled" probably says a lot about old Southlake. Several months later, the council members discussed visiting the Tarrant County commissioners at the Fort Worth courthouse. As the minutes of the meeting described it: "They go in small groups to pay friendly calls on the County Commissioners in charge of roads and other matters to establish friendly relations before we need to ask favors of them." Plain -talking, old Southlake style. Happy birthday, Southlake. 4 Streets of Southlake will be .. ' avedwith the color p green by Donna Stengle The Southlake City Council recently approved funds to match a S 10,000 Texas Forest Grant that will allow for about 60 trees to be planted along three major roads in the city. Additionally, a landscape archi- tect will design a street tree mas- ter plan for the roadways. Tree plantings for Continental Boulevard, Dove Road and White's Chapel Boulevard will be master -planned to coincide with the ultimate improvement and widening of the streets. Some trees will be planted in demon- stration sites. The city's goal in planning and planting the sites is twofold. First, the trees will beautify the road- ways and second, the sites will serve as educational tools for resi- dents to learn which trees grow well in this area. Southlake is located in the Cross Timbers area of the state and has many post oaks and blackjack oaks. These native trees are not tolerating the develop- ment and suburban yards which are rapidly taking over their natu- ral habitat. The city has experienced an average increase in population of 20 percent per year and is con- sidered one of the fastest grow- ing communities in Texas. Many of those moving to Southlake come from other regions of the country and are unfamiliar with native Texas trees. City officials are dedicated to promoting, maintaining and re- establishing the urban forest in Southlake. They hope the street tree master plan and demonstra- tion project will help the city reach that goal. A variety of plants will be used, including many that are native to North Texas. The trees will also be grouped in certain arrange- ments for interest, growth pat- terns and attractiveness. Home- owners will be able to use the knowledge they receive from the demonstration sites in planting trees in their own yards. The city of Southlake is plan- ning for the project to be long- term in scope and hopes other civic groups such as Boy Scout troops and Keep Southlake Beau- tiful will want to be involved. These groups might want to adopt a section of a road to plant. An estimated 60 trees 2 inches in diameter will be planted as part of the initial grant. There will be a wide variety of species. Variet- ies will include cedar elms, Texas mountain laurels, ponderosa pines, Chinese pistache, Eastern and Texas redbuds, blue spruce, Mexican sycamores, black wal- nuts and desert willows. Last January, Southlake began the first citywide street tree plant- ing project called "Street Trees For Southlake." The city split the cost of trees purchased from Green Oaks Nursery in Southlake with residents who chose to par- ticipate. Each tree was then planted for the homeowner along the right-of-way surrounding his or her residence. The homeowners were asked to. commit to watering and taking care of the trees for the first two (see "Council, "page 4) Photo by Donna Stenale NJ H pOr C m n Council from page 1 years. to ensure the trees would have a good chance to grow. Dick Johnston, Southlake vol- unteer of the year, oversaw the program. Homeowners were able to select trees from four different ery—lace bark elm, Chinese pistache, cedar elm and burr oak. A total of 54 trees were planted through the program last year. The program was funded through a federal public outreach grant administered through the Texas Forest Service, which the city has applied for again this varieties at Green Oaks Nurs- year. PI Ik Lal Qw, Source: mews NEWS CLIPPING 1 HCipp14 ./ r SouthICOMA ke 1 b oqeol • / SZ�cm_ Date: "I -a--) --) — How long have YOU lived in Southlake? 30, 409 50 years? Come share your stories and old photos of Southlake's past: What: Southlake's 40th Birthday Party When: Sunday, September 29 Time: 1:00 - 5:00 p.m. Where: Bicentennial Park (pavilion near baseball fields) For more information call 481-5581 ext. 819. Tents and chairs will be set up to gather with old friends and newcomers to swap stories and share memories about Southlake. Schedule of events: 1:00 - Children's bicycle parade 1:30 - Croquet & horseshoes begin 1:45 - Lake Cities Band plays 2:30 - Presentation by Mayor Stacy 3:00 - Birthday cake served 4:45 - Winners announced A NEWS CLIPPING Source: New "Gun Safety For Kids Week" in Southlake v Date: q _q 1p Carroll students learn about the dangers of guns by Donna Stengle More than 2,000 children in the Carroll Independent School Dis- trict participated in the Eddie Eagle Gun Safety Program this week at area campuses. The national program was part of Gun Safety for Kids Week and was taught by Carrie Fullington, community service officer for the Southlake Department of Public Safetv. Fullington's goal was to edu- cate Southlake children in kinder- garten through the fourth grade about the dangers of guns and the correct action to take when they find a gun. A number of teaching materi- als were used, including an ani- mated video, workbooks, posters and handouts. They all reinforced a four -point message: "Stop! (see ".Saf Ah _."page 2) .- Safety from page 1 Don't Touch. Leave The Area. Tell An Adult." "Stop" and "Don't Touch" were the most important messages the l children learned about what they should do if they encountered a gun of any type. "Leave The Area" and "Tell An Adult" taught the children to leave the room or immediate area where the gun was found and to notify a trustworthy adult such as a parent, teacher or police officer. Fullington said these four steps are critical in helping to prevent a gun -related accident. "We want this to be just as f memorable as the 'Stop, Drop and Roll' that they learn from the n fire department." The children learned a dance to help them remember the rules. : Role playing was a big part of the week's activities. The students acted out different scenarios that helped them remember to follow the four -point plan in every situ- ation. Teachers and students had l many discussions throughout the week about gun safety. Students talked about the difference be- tween real guns and toy guns and learned that if they aren't sure if a gun is real, they should always treat it like it is. The national gun safety pro- gram targets kindergartners through fourth -graders because typically, 7- to 9-year-olds are the youngsters most likely to be ac- cidental shooting victims. Many times, children are looking for hidden presents when they come across a gun in their home. Several years ago, a 3-year-old Southlake child accidentally shot himself in the cheek with a gun he found at his home. Fullington said the police de- partment could not estimate how many guns there are in Southlake homes since residents are not re- quired to register guns kept in homes. She did say because hunt- ing is a popular hobby, the num- ber is probably significant. Also, many families move to f Southlake from other areas where the crime rate may be higher. This could account for more guns in homes. It is important to remember that even if a family does not own any guns, children might visit the homes of friends whose parents keep guns. The Eddie Eagle Gun Safety Program will conclude with a coloring/poster contest. All stu- dents at each school will have the opportunity to enter a poster or drawing depicting the message they learned from the program. Winners will be chosen from each grade level and prizes will be given for first, second and third places. The Southlake Department of Public Safety plans to repeat the program annually for incoming kindergartners and new students -and hopes the message is one that will prevent injuries and fatalities among Southlake children. PC PC i� m W 21 d W A a m r � a m s3 3� .3 �; oD e � s; y A S 4 0 f Ki r. m o m ; S 10 2. w 3 ~• = n C O 7 N y n 3 n y ac •n •. C i � v S 7 � 7• S^ �. -Oi J� O 7 _ A :,' I�^9 K •• x -fix � O. . '� F C n 1 S CJ ,y O 7 • TO S' n n Al ' << .". 'JI :.' m y fSi E' F- '.70 .V r=j' .'J -' — •-'� � -fin � � � o � � ^� • 7� y S A O43 S " .' E " (IQE n n� 3 IL m O' 1 3n o z•� cf � _•� a� � �M� �i _ OMWAA O � •, is n Zi yp fY m O o zm (bol s oa OMA r b z d R __J A l yaly llc,olp•,,,{y, T1, J, II `I\ .^, 1 i-LIP 7.yuuL'uH luawdulanapletluaP .,Ao I. . 'a�pl{..: .I��I�„l: „q{: 1,�1 .;1 ..1'd iantin pvoiltrl �,ni,nq tI I •plalsaA Aul,uui dot ua�t; ' 11ptu OZS IPut l pur yunoJ ,11 l r�;.l tu,wn�rl r; r.v:,ucuN ,irlyln(IS-11 pun,ur —%;,— r ...lpnl, teJJol� �aue�'daaalelS- 1eaA lxau auluut3aq untl?n.11`u' 'd r „ : u T i l `t'xa 1. lol uotlllw Uy5 ay.l. . waav 1 palnpags st pur pahun{ ua, , { 'sauel NJI171i unnu aqi ,.1pn1. y�tyM •asrgd pnyl a4.1. -i xqy .l Is11) S,a3urll71alu1 ay1 uo auop H st not mwn uo;, 't„loid 11-, o l/,+emaa.d 11od1I\ aql u1 laal0111 try�lalul anua�t: llrywty paste UP 11. 11( .0 1.1. ,� 1 ..l.l ,,. (1 PIQ1H sa.1% — •paana/a tn.11 fu Jy� to at/11an a.st sn coos so Jno gofat/J JanaJaoa un.) a,x sunartt J1 •s.uau poo;'st Still,, y,rq paq.nd %11 un1;0 ,.,trp aqt yan„y1 ua\a 'aaalold I quou'l of �Juo pa01';sr our snir.p ulllal or11w,) uoWl--,�uni pur w1.ItentJt:,ads •weld ay: a;nldwl,� 01 s1r.a:N in(,l utgo\N 3u1pu^,l 1nt n;grga alp. slaalold aql :r.q1 sueaut 4po11d dol se ssed.{q a-loueoa a slsll uorsslwwo� ua1Jo •s11ud11e aauelllt" put g11o.%t 1.10 j;se1180 ojlel�odsuell sexal a41 •a-loueoll ul do syaeq aq1 uaaMlaq .Gawt blew a •t(1 sexal uo )11e11 , f\313H !�A 4 -- L-10 ayl aof sMau lvaaff sl styl •uorstaap s, uogsstwguoa a yl yltM jagddv y aq 1, upinoa 1 ayvl yl noS fo luaptsaa v pun aunt ug uotsstwww ayl passa.gppv iv yl u0t1v8alap ayl fo aagwaw v sd„ -tsar pue le13laww03 ul gloq •lsooq 31wou032 ue uM01 ayl W9 111M ssrdAq ajoueog ay1 p}es •diyslau -11cd 1-11 UodollaW aql Jo lagwaw e -3-MI J 00r 10AeW alloueo'l -pies suloW'Alelgi-j1s1nH aq) w t ,lap •w•d Z 1e aq IIIM 1l •Aluno:) 1ue11e1 IMTJoh loJ palnpayas st s9ulleay aa141 Jo 1s11j a41 „'1sg 1no uo lnd Apealle aney aM spalold ale asayl -spuawwo -311 uoisscwwoa uopellodsuell ayl 1eyM sanwdde liaunoa ayl 'g2noyl •.i1leuo1l!pe11„ 'pies sillolti ..'lenoldde 1eug JOJ lagwanoN 10 lagoiop ut liaunoJ uopeuod -sue11 ItU012ag 341 01 11 a11el Ip.M aM uayl 'veld sigl ioJ las s8uueag oilgnd aa1g1 Jo sauas a aney aM„ •sluawwanOS JO 1[auno3 aql 1oJ uotlellodsuell Jo 1o1�a1 -Ip •s►11oW laegoiW pies `pataadxa si leyl lenoldde — Supluel A1?loild dtquauued tl1 uodwlalS Jo uewimo i3jes P3106eW 111lA,CalloJ — „7aodagb aauvtll N of svuglo'q sv7 wo.gf'.gopgagoa ayl fo llv fo spaau ayl uotlually s, uotssgwwoa ayl of lysnoaq It 'uglsnv of luam am uayM 7aaloadayl uo payloM oyM sn fo /lv aof paly8�qap lsnf w�l„ s uoisstwwaoD p g1iM lnauoa lsnw sluawulaAOD Jo punoJ sexal 1r.11uaD glloN ayl Jo punoD uot1 -rllodsuell leuoiAa21 ayl put+ pus sppljJo uounjodsucli •lrnolddc 1oJ do sawoa 1a2pnq uon -an115uO3 ACMg2Iq aids S 1r3A VC:) sr srxal Inopnolyl sla4l0 411M aladwoa vow 11ps iaa(o1d yard lay pateudold -de uaaq seq Aauow ou ytnoy1 -Ir -s1raA 1noJ lxau a41 8uunp aut -punt loJ 1sq lloys r uo sl3a(old aq1 send — ACplalsaA 1uaW WOa lnoyll.h, ua,13 — snlrls I Aluoud aq,l I 5rd w01 j KT l A Y IN Im _.cause..otfrne cornaor-s-sapia,., growth. Northead arrant cities Y: ' ;along the highWaa aye dded '9 ",400 houses. 2$;. and _ . the - past six years. That growth is ex-pect�cl go Y _ It. ]m can SonW4e l�: th9�.?s to continue at an faster pace in the next five years we 'we get a rigIt . p lam° "a One• �of the most heavily traf_ said ficked amn alongTexas 114.driUbe from Dove Road to Soutlilake State , e MineNa n, R- inre- plower Motcd, said lease yesterday that she glad that the commission decided to ex-. pedite the improvements along this "With projects such as corridor. With projects such as the the... speedway, the • • • speedway, the continued devel- opment of Alliance and otheri anti - continued development cipated, this is -in area where road ; of Alliance and others improvements are essential "i .? 1 anticipated, this is an r area where road state Rep Nancy Moffat R - Southlake, said, "As a member of .' improvements are the delegation that addressed the , essential." commission in June and a resident — State Sen. Jam Nelson of Southlake; I couldn't be happier with the commission's decision: R-Flower Mound This is great news for the area.",., c• : Boulevard, where the daily average Staff writers Carlos Mescas and number of vehicles will increase Miles Moffeit contributed to this rp from a current 46,000 to 110,000 by port, ± 2015, according to state projec- tions. The commission agreed yester- day to grant Priority 2 status to an interchange at Dove Road. Priority 2• authorizes acquisition of right of way and preliminary design of the project, Morris said. Wes Heald, Fort Worth district engineer for the Texas Department of Transportation, said the state .can draw up plans for Priority 1 nrniectc as cnon as nncsihle. l J A H NEWS CLIPPLNG 11 Source: _SA-Z� Y 7'�f_ k f-C� ra m I Date: "I - a W New Toastmasters meets weekly Organization helps public -,speaking SOUTHLAKE — The newly formed Southlake-area chapter of Toastmasters International con- venes at 7 a.m. every Monday at Southlake Community Center in Bi- centennial Park. Toastmasters provides a forum for developing or improving public - speaking skills, presentation tech- niques, managerial qualities, funda- mentals of planning and leader- ship, and team -building. The local group is co -sponsored by the South - lake Chamber of Commerce and the city of Southlake. For more infor- mation, call the chamber at (817) 481.8200 or Tracy Southers at (817) 481-SS81, ext. 819. ■ SOUTHLAKE — Mark Hood will be the guest speaker at the South - lake Chamber of Commerce month- ly luncheon. Mr. Hood will talk about the local Baylor Medical Cen- ter expansion. The luncheon will be at 11:30 a.m. Monday at the Mar- riott Solana Hotel. For reservations, gro�p�� m Southl4k*� skips NEWS BRIEFS' �' call the Southlake chamber if (SM 481-8200. The Society of WatercolorArti is will present its fall workshop Oct. 22-24 at First Congreg8tto�all Church, 4201 Trail Lake Dike �n Fort Worth. Sonya Terpen dg Will be the instructor. Ms. Terpeh ft has exhibited her works and won awards at Prix De West, Artists of America, the Oklahoma Society of Impressionists, the Southern Water- color Society and the Western Fed- eration of Watercolor Societies. For Society of Watercolor Artists members, the workshop costs $105 for all three days, or $40 per day on a space -available basis. For guests, the cost is $135 for all three days, or $50 per day. A $35 deposit is re- quired to hold a workshop space. , For more information, call Gwen Meharg at (817) 346.2673. Bond sale wins big in Carroll balloting $44 million will help build school, buy land BY YAMIL BERARD Star= I'elearam Staff Writer SOUTHLAKE — Residents of the Carroll school district solidly supported a $44 million bond refer- endum yesterday, despite opposi- tion from some voters put off by the highest school tax rate in Northeas Tarrant County. The proposition passed by a mar- y, gin of more than 2-1. Of the 1,716 votes cast, 1,194 voters favored it and 522 were opposed, according to, unofficial results. For many voters, the inducement was preserving Carroll's Blue Rib- bon schools and its academic repu-b;! tation amid breakneck growth. The, l district has led Tarrant County in, rate of growth, adding 600 students;', this vear. Carroll currentiv hasik about 4.800 students. Yesterday's vote is an example of, the strong loyalty to Carroll,;,. schools, officials said. "I feel really great about it," said" Linda Smiles; principal at Carroll.; High School. "It's nice to get a vote.; of confidence from the community to move forward. The whole dis4! trict will benefit from this vote." T Over the next two to three years,r.,. (More on VOTE on Page 3) 4� W, d A Ow W V ^ H U.>' h Cc 3 °' n .c .0 .r C3. y y) • 2 C N .3 _ in y v c O enc— p yY.y o c �; $ �0' utj y ci (5 Q� y mb y w _t�A p p ce N B 0 3 .5 'C 0>+.0 cc o E� 0 cu co �oon.�j:c �� a� c °j _ F it o N y 00 O cef «t r—�fU. > a R 0 o E al °' �� �� E u W cn 4 CQ U no a a (L) .= c 3�ro��oEo Ego-°'a°i.c�= > = O cC tcC. vvi F + O + cn O ar E a U cn.� a> 'O O of >, 'n G. U C0 F4 Cc' w � vi RJ U ca ♦... i� +.+ o.� a c aa°i R y O O °rod cQ �n p .0 ��, c > Z 4) N y vVi O N M E y 0 Cc 0.30� 0ow.R>(u >>� O w v�i p O C R O^ O O > cz pLO a E � IV S.cc ctsw w�En k O sg •� •3co>oa •��,� O R w O O k c >'O O= C aU .a .= w �' ' co c >+ 00 L and �f traded i� .40 14 to bu groce S outhlake plans' to expand park' BY LESLIE HUEHOLT Star -Telegram Staff Writer SOUTHLAKE — The city his agreed to swap an acre with devel- opers who plan to rebuild the;; Crossroads Square shopping center' with a Tom Thumb grocery store as._, its anchor. California -based Pima Proper ties, which has offices in Las Co nas, wants to build a 59,000-square s foot Tom Thumb in a spot occupiedAL by a vacant building that used to 6' It a Food Lion grocery store. Pima7s plan also involves tearing down''.; eight other existing businesses f around the vacant building. Those; businesses will be relocated within,' the rebuilt shopping center, said it David McMahan, vice president of Pima. The project will cost Pima abo��.� $6.5 million, McMahan said. They rebuilt center will look similar to the existing center, which sits northwest of Farm Road 1709 and North White Chapel Boulevard,`'; south of Bicentennial Park. "It's a helluva undertaking: We're going to tear down every-* thing between Eckerd Drugs and Movies 'N Video and add shops to'', the south of Pizza Hut and to this -A' north of Movies 'N Video," McM= han said. "Essentially, it's an shaped building and it will end up (More on BUILDING on Page 6) `=:Q OvfK-4? w � i" • Ct et s d uilding From Page 1B 1 L-shaped building." For the plan to succeed, McMa- in said Pima needs 1.174 acres of 7-acre tract the city owns. The city roperty is a buffer for the shop- ing center and includes trees and ;gment of a walking trail. Last night, the City Council oted to trade Pima the 1.174 acres f city property for 1.5 acres of 'ima property. Pima will also pay he city $57,000, because the city's roperty is valued higher than the 'ima property — $153,418 com- iared with Pima's $96,598. In an informal agreement be- ween the two entities, the city has seen using the Pima property for PaTk purposes at no cost to the city. property will continue to be for park land, Hawk said. We'll be picking up some prop - that we need to tie into the It's contiguous to the park," Hawk said, adding that the tract is one of several pieces around Bicen- tennial Park that the city hopes to acquire. The land swap also benefits the city by helping fill a vacant grdcery store, officials say: Pima will cut down and .T4place some cedar trees -on the 1.174 acres, but pine trees will not be affected, Hawk said. . The Southlake Parks and Recre- ation Board voted in favor of the land swap in August, saying Bicen- tennial Park can benefit by having the Pima property. McMahan began talking to the city two years ago about building a Tom Thumb in Crossroads Square. He proposed swapping land with the city in January, he said. Now, McMahan must submit his plans to city staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission. With final approval from the City Coun- cil in the coming months, the shop- ping center could be rebuilt in eight months starting in December, Mc- Mahan said. lk Ic Southlake (WWI building destroyed BY BETSY BLANEY Star -Telegram Staff Writer SOUTHLAKE — Troy Calli stood about 30 yards away last night and watched as flames de- stroyed what could have been a Southlake restaurant. No one was injured in the fire that broke out about 7:30 p.m. in the 2900 block of White Chapel Boulevard, fire officials said. Calli, owner of the 3-story wood building that was gutted by fire, said he has been getting an average of one call a week in recent months from people interested in turning the former furniture store into an eatery. Calli also owns American Aquat- ics, an exotic fish export business, housed in two nearby buildings that once served as barns for an eques- trian center. He and his family also live in a home on the property. "It's a bummer," he said. "I don't ever want to see this again." Firefighters from eight depart- ments throughout Northeast Tar- rant County battled the fire. When the first truck arrived, 40 percent of the rear part of the building was in flames, said Robert Finn, spokes- man for the city's Department of Public Safety. Information about the cause of the fire and the amount of damage was unavailable late yesterday. Be- cause of the size of the structure, eight fire investigators were ex-, pected to be on the scene through the night"to determine the cause. The blaze was under control by 9:30 p.m., fire officials said. The fire started on the first floor near the back of the building, Calli's employees told him. A pass- ing motorist stopped at American Aquatics and notified employees that smoke was coming from the building. he said. A N c � d A N INFEWS CLIPPLNG 11 Source: S+-CA �- T-e 1 tG Ka YY1 iDate: 1 0 — 3 —q 1p 11 Electrical problem cited in fire - filar r<Icgu SOUTHLAKE — Fire of- ficials yesterdav blamed an elec- trical problem for a fire Tuesday night that destroved a vacant building on White Chapel Bou- levard. The 3-story wood buildine. formerly Bill .Massey Furniture, is a total loss, said spokesman Robert Finn of the Southlake Department of Public Safety. A dollar estimate of damage to the I1,000-square-foot build- ing had not been made by insur- ance adjusters as of late yester- day. Finn said. The building sits next to prop- erty that previously was home to an equestrian center. Two near- by structures were stables at the center«'but now house American AquattCs,, an exotic fish export business that ships to cities throughout the country. the owner, Troy Calli, has said. Calli also owns the building that burned. He said he had re- ceived several telephone calls in recent months from people in- terested in buying the building and opening a restaurant. The fire broke out about 730 p.m. in the 2900 block of White Chapel Boulevard. Firefighters from eight departments had the blaze under control by about 9:30 p.m. Some of the burned structure was built with old telephone poles that had been treated with creosote and that used to line White Chapel Boulevard. When IBM offices moved into the area a few years ago. taller. metal telephone poles replaced the wood ones, Calli said. Massey bought the poles and used them as supports inside and outside the building. Firefighters extinguish the last of the fire that consumed a vacant Southlake building Tuesday night. M NEWS CLIPPING II Source: DQ l I Q s MUY h 16A Mtw s I Date: 10 —4 - q �;-] Resourceful Carroll- prepares for Denton By Temple Pouncey Special Contributor to The Dallas Morning News SOUTHLAKE — The Carroll Drag- ons have a passer and a receiver ranked in the area's Class 4A top 10 — but no ball carriers. That is not quite the norm for one of o area's traditional football powers d one of the foremost exponents of M! a Wishbone. To head coach Tom Rapp, who has a final nondistrict test coming up Friday night against Den- ton, the stats simply reflect the best use of available opportunities. "Whatever the defense gives us, we will take," Rapp said. Carroll beefed up its schedule this year and started off with its first -ever Class SA opponent, Carrollton Newman A ■ WHEN: Friday, 7:30 p.m. ■ WHERE: Dragon Stadium, Southlake (capacity 4,000, grass) , N. Carroll at Dove Road, one mile north of Hwy. 114. ■ TICKETS: $7 at gate. ■ RECORDS: Denton 2-1-1, Carroll 1-2--1. Smith. Though Rapp did not have a premier rushing threat returning from last year's team, he found Newman Smith concentrating on shutting down the Dragons' option plays. So Rapp and offensive coordinator Duke Christian called pass plays, and senior Brian LaC- roix started pinpointing short passes to junior Austin Cranford. The combination worked in that game and continued to click in Game 2 against Cleburne. "We were taking advantage of the short underneath zones," Rapp said. "Then the defense started to take that away. The last couple of games, oppo- nents have played more man-to-man defense instead of zone, and last week we were more successful running the ball." LaCroix (6.1,180), a pitcher and first baseman in the spring, is the third leading passer in District 9.4A, with 497 yards on 72 attempts, ranking him Please see CARROLL on Page 8N. • Carro re 11 p paring, Iotake o Denton Continued from Page 1N. ood job there When we sixth in the area in 4A. Cranford (5-10, 1s0), also one of the baseball team's mainstays, is third in the district and ninth in the area with 14 catches for 200 yards. "Brian does a good job throwing," Rapp said. He worked on it in the summer. He will establish himself in the pocket and does not have happy feet. He stands in and delivers. Last season, he wound up as the understudy for senior Chance Caple, and there were no complaints. He learned a lot. "He has also done an outstanding job of reading the option. Wichita Falls last week was giving us the fullback, and he made the correct read each time, and we were able to move the ball. He also has gotten better at recog- nizing defenses and checking off. Duke Christian has done a good job with Brian." Cranford lacks breakaway speed, Rapp said, but makes up for it in other ways. "Austin is not afraid to go over the middle and make the tough catch," Rapp said. "He works well on the out- side routes, too. He is also our kicker and does a g run the option well, you have to give credit to Austin and the other receiv- ers because they do a great job of block- ing. They have to, or we don't move the ball." The Dragons, who settled for a 14-14 tie last week with Wichita Falls, must eliminate turnovers against Denton, a team that demanded everyone's atten- tion by tying Stephenville in its open- er. "Denton is a very quick team, the quickest we've faced," Rapp said. "We must have a good mix on offense to be successful against them. We have thrown more this year than we might have in another year because of the caliber of teams we've faced. When you play quality people, you have to hive good balance. "We have had good quarterbacks in the past who could throw, such as Chance Caple and Chris Brown. Our philosophy has always been to run the option and to throw when we want to, not when we have to." Temple Pouncey is a Dallas-basyd tree -lance writer. P] lk Dave Lieber NORTHEAST BEAT Open door can handicap golf game It was late at night and the Southlake man sat at his kitchen table filling out insurance claim forms. A few weeks before, members of the notorious Northeast Tarrant County Golf Bag Gang had crept into Don Allen's garage in the middle of the night and stole his prized — and, to him, irreplaceable — golf clubs: "I'd like to know how they get so:' bold as to walk into somebody's r personal property and walk off with something," he grumbled. The missing clubs have caused a change of heart in Don about his neighborhood's security. Although the Allens left their garage door open that night, Don and his wife, Brady, feel invaded. They have talked to other residents in their Chapel Downs neighborhood about forming a crime -watch group. Don's clubs and his golf bag contents were valued at $2,600. Don's insurance company, which he's had 32 years, notified him that it will accept his golf bag claim. But if he files one more claim before 1999, his policy might be canceled. The Golf Bag Gang strikes again. Don's case has ended up with a (More on LIEBER on Page 4) H Dvt+, I6 PFF �• .,, bon ay c..^� cv•3: w E y^ y t C�a ar F� � E 7 •� u tA y3s s? or p ca w a;F+ ro .L+ y ,,� 7 t� Z /I0^-0 V ^r i o >.: O CV:N ° y y Cq C L ^p O y O fl O it Z fA m y O 'ti. ° O .� c OO C O O A v' G—.. c0 v"� OO tu b `v0 c Owb 1 0 E 0 _ _ y O O w O rn t O'y O y ;O � O . � � cC c0 L C •w•. Y 3 s v EIj 0 GL �Lp�L �CLp ,, pq rn T? >, C �. y v G 0 b 3 F, 0 V B c^ vi s 2 a v a O 0 R 'p t1. E v O vyi O TL cCC oG p cC7 O L L 3 ca y M G C w y y C y h > n •C � cC O N c cc'O G L C p cc ayu -Q &A > L y 3CL y 3 y cz � �.. —O y a `� Y y y a. M O �On cz y v G. C u :a = cd y v°i"'V .E `n U J •� � O 'L7 R a b :1. �y C1 >, o°D + O > _ > O co iC vyi cz7z w y y > m °a° E a? O a CCL ? c b L cc y q ,y N cC cC cd w Ojo OD 'b O cz Cl. �' . p ., E cc cC = C > O o ae co 3 ' H F� v�i 00 y w � y ;fl E 'O ryi, in GA N S C OD O N 3L Quo Ca3 n y Ex one 3 3 Rs n oU 3 a, eZ a a o°no�o PI F NEWS CLIPPING 11 Source: Sta r -T , � e q YD"M I Date: I D— H— q (0 I ".,V w" v"M0GE0.4 Carroll OK9 bond overs transport a referendum SOUTHLAKE — Resi- dents of the Carroll school district solidly supported a $44 million bond referendum Saturday, despite opposi- tion from some voters put off by the highest property tax rate among North- east Tarrant County districts. The proposition passed by a margin of more than 2-1. Of the 1,716 votes cast, 1,194 voters favored it and 522 were opposed, staff writer Yamil Berard reported. Through the next two to three years, the bond will pay for a seventh-, eighth- and ninth -grade campus, land for four school sites, technology improvements, expanding the high school and other projects. Work is expected to begin within a year. The bond is expected.to increase property taxes $9 a year for the owner of a home valued at $200,000. Some voters adamantly opposed the bond issue, saying Carroll taxes are the highest in Tarrant County. The dis- trict's tax rate is about $1.73 per $100 of assessed property value. 04 dm m p a m `m:�co e 0 'm" r ' �,.cs sC' a opOr o oc � �m� ea rr � roo' M■�l • �� �Ga0Oa0 A w lb p FT .my —0 R, CD m ao R, m o .. a oao�m.�'g KOt Z� O y a 0 �cry H O A �' y y N P 5. c�D nm.. � A a '.°'.'� Vyi lD fD Vmi .y+ �$ �yo ao .+ y p A a• CA'A cD G O o a O m y c�D O— p x O cIs .+ n 0 G m y cm cD G. m cr p � C cD cD o O I m cD cp < m ° .y .mr ii m '0 m m a y c a�a CD `e �. m m r+ 0. 00 M 00 fyam d U% O (IQ cp M fD cm • a' M v y cm .0 cm .^' cD m 0. y CD -, ��a' CM ►may- ° a� o a~ o R0. 0 o a o o O 'o a O"� O M m° c<m O" rr* cam (D a m �• y pm.myyp°A f3 m z O m a ►"'. f1 \�+ 'y! > .m ma'om pr—rX' • m uj y cD Co ° a < :0 � � T C p • A O .y 00 N • !y ,.� a• cmrA cm57 Fr,, Shp+ ate, r 07 �O • cm co,co, O m —. Er C — m O 0 c<D cam 9 tyD A C �* tir � � a m( O. 0~ R "Cf ;mom" mpn a 0 -CD m .�. `mC aao c�D p Cos A p� a' .cy.�] CL Oao � `mC � � cm 0 � � p. C�CD a r. cD �. �°! m .+ m A O "Gy'd�A�bcc0��� O < rr 0 00 A r+ .mi .z_ [�7 S, Q s d A q cr. c t r ca4 - cC o as:y � ^ � ti aa�i� ° � � ow wVoi apb " y a�a^ddy ! .Vy, .3aooti0a�0�dbqC °bo owp a1� qcVa°. )Oa bac°ac. O w a /0 CD a.0 o P F~ �. a a� IV 46 nl S. 3 ti �r >;�r, 0 '44- r4 ao�a�o �.�o 0.eao �. moy3 y$Y 0�o V�r v���ypooc°i cy. xa�i rA C1 p . . icc r a% o 10 N y cp.. ca ca �. "O0 Q rqi 10 >y0 N�a� �ygd°wvor"� °tiaoom ia3 w a� a a o 0 Its! 0 Pk �� r+v33 �aaa».rc>a tlraoor«+Ls.a� c.aa3 O ',U,a�i$3 �ayr� �up,abD > ti Z y y Y a� O; r O .0 3 O go y p I.. � to ca N a4 f yw H o yr a N b�..ba r'm .0p oe a 0$y o a `V 7•► f1 a .q �t ;3 cc w -o ° p4 o N� p �U y Q o= 41)i q� q o 4) c v a..rr3c°i c°,ar.scc� S.. 029h� � a PI FE 0 (40.1 NEWS CLIPPING II Source: S OL.1-i'1� U U /� _e�S 8 11 Y)1ZS I Date: j D—LI "-q ro �I 114 relief - - years away for drivers by Desmond McCrohan Local residents will face years of worsening traffic j ams on State Highway 114 before actual im- provements are made. That's because the earliest the' $66 million OK'd last week by the Texas Transportation Com- mission could be spent on im- provements to the highway is 1999, said Ed Baker, mayor of Colleyville. In the meantime, the Texas In- ternational Raceway, located at SH 114 and Interstate 35W in southern Denton County, will open sometime this April. When that happens, as many as 150,000 people a day could come (see "Road,"page 8) vv� Road from poge I to the races. That will cause even more pile- ups on the highway. "It is a mess," said Baker, who is the chairman of the Metroport 114 Partnership, a coalition of cities, counties, school districts and companies that lobbied for state funding to expand the high- way. Last Thursday, four improve- menti to SH 114 were authorized into Priority I status —meaning they were approved for comple- tion within four years. A Roanoke bypass and three freeway -style interchanges in Southlake were among the pro- jects approved. Specifically, improvements are slated to be made from Interst$te 35W to east of U.S. Highway 377, from Kirkwood Boulevard East to Dove Lane, from Carroll Avenue to Kimball Avenue and from Kimball Avenue. to Wall Street. Additionally, SH 114 from Dove Lane to Carroll Avenue was authorized as a Priority II project, allowing the preparation of plans, specifications and estimates, and right-of-way acquisition for that area. Within the next few years, Tarrant County should be expe- riencing even larger traffic jams because it is one of the fastest - growing counties in the state. Residents of Southlake and Grapevine will be especially af- fected by increased traffic on SH 114 because many drivers use it as a direct route through those cit- ies. Until the improvements are made, traffic will be moved onto State Highway 26and State High- way 121, Baker said. That will mean longer com- mute times for area residents. However, in retrospect, the mayor said he was happy with the I amount of money allocated. "I was very surprised and de- lighted with these things on the [approved] list," he said. Instead of the four projects ap- proved, he was expecting only one or two. Money for improvements would not have been approved by the state if not for Metroport 114 Partnership's lobbying, he said. About 250 representatives of the group went to Austin on June 18. They presented a 10-year, $200 million plan for widening the highway to the Texas Depart- ment of Transportation. The Metroport 114 Partnership will keep pushing for more funds for future improvements to the highway. "I wish there was an instant solution [to the traffic problem]. There's not a whole lot we can do right now —except to be thankful that we did get a com-. mitment," Baker said. P1 lk It 31 NEWS CLIPPING II Source: Date: to `_4 —G \p Issue of,,soccer fields is kicked around,.:a� by Donna Stengle , F The city of Southlake's Parks and Recreation Board held an other meeting on Sept. 24 to give citizens an opportunity to ask questions and give input on the proposed master plans for Bicen- tennial and Bob Jones parks. SPIN 2 representative Martin Schelling, SPIN 1 representative Cara White and parks board member Larry Goldstein con- ducted the meeting. Also present were Kim. Lenior, director of the Parks and Recreation Depart- ment, and two representatives of MESA Design Associates, the landscape architects for the project. The meeting was " held in the Carroll High School auditorium because of an anticipated high turnout by residents near Bob Jones Park. Other, citizens want- ing to show support for the soc- cer fields planned for the area of the park closest to residences were also expected to attend. An estimated 150 people were' present, many of them children' dressed in their soccer uniforms. The two groups have been lob- bying the parks board for several months in an effort to make sure their interests are kept in mind. About 60 residents in the neigh- borhood surrounding Bob Jones Park are concerned about the soc- (see "Soccer, "page 3) Soccer from page 1 cer fields that the city is planning to build on 17 acres of relatively flat land with few or no trees. MESA and the city of Southlake agree that the area lends itself well to the proposed use. Unfor- tunately, it is close to existing residential areas. If the fields are built there, the quiet atmosphere the homeown- ers have enjoyed may change. Even though the city plans to build berms and plant a 200-foot landscape buffer, it will not be enough, according to the resi- sented some soccer parents, read a petition he said had been put to- gether in about 10 days. The petition contained the names of 250 citizens and stated the immediate need for soccer fields in Southlake. The citizens asked the city to begin construct- ing the fields as soon as possible to have them available for the 1997 fall soccer season. Most of the frustration on the part of the soccer parents seems to be in the delay of constructing the fields, not in the location of them. Previously, Mario Vitale, com- missioner for the under-12 teams dents. in the Grapevine/Southlake Soc- The residents said they are not against having the soccer fields at Bob Jones Park —they just did not want them in their backyards. The group has proposed alternate plans for locating the fields fur- ther south and buffering them with a lake, berms and evergreen shrubbery. Chris Miltenberger, who repre- cer Association, said he didn't care where the fields are built as long as they are built soon. This fall, 2,250 players regis- tered to play with the association. The number represents a 30 per- cent increase over the spring sea- son signup. Currently, all games are played in Grapevine at Oakgrove Park, and there is a critical shortage of practice fields available. During the question -and -an- swer period of the meeting, Terry Arterburn of MESA Design was asked if it would be feasible to move the fields farther south in the parks master plan. Arterbum said even though some fields might be lost, he thought there probably is an alternate plan that could be used. Lenior said after the meeting that the city has requested that MESA develop a new schematic drawing that will place the fields further south and away from the residential area. She said the city would also look into the cost of changing the plan and carrying out the new plan for the fields. She hoped to have the information ready for the Oct. 10 parks board work session. The board will hold a regular meeting and public hearing on the parks master plan on Monday, Oct. 14, at 6:30 p.m. in the City Council chambers. Photo by Donna Stengle P] W f 9 NEWS CLIPPING II Source: %v tW S 14 7t M Q.s I Date: I C) 'LA _qb II Firefighters battle blaze in Southlake News and Times The Southlake Department of Public Safety, Fire Services re- sponded at 7:24 p.m. to a: three- story commercial structure fire on Tuesday, Oct. 1. Upon arrival, firefighters faces 30 to 40 percent involvement in the rear two floors of the build- ing. Firefighters from Southlake, Grapevine, Colleyville, Keller, Trophy Club, Euless, North Rich- land Hills and Bedford were called to battle the fire. The fire was brought under control at 9:31 p.m. Investigators from the Tarrant County Arson Task Force will be investigating the cause of the fire. Fire officials do not suspect ar- son at this time. NEWS CLIPPING II Source: N 'eJw 4 m Date: I C) — L} -0 �, I Council still'. questions subdivision by Donna Stengle Southlake Woods moved closer to becoming a reality Tuesday '. night when City Council mem- bers voted to approve a prelimi- nary plat for the subdivision. The development proposed for the north side of Continental Boule- vard, east of Davis Boulevard and south of Southlake Boulevard, has faced its share of controversy both from area residents and from the City Council. The council recently told Toll Brothers, Inc., the developers, that it was concerned that traffic on Peytonville and Continental boulevards would be too heavy if ° P the subdivision was constructed ; with entrances on either of those roads. Also, when construction begins on Continental Boulevard for im- provements that the city plans to make on that road, traffic could become even more congested with an additional housing devel- opment in the area. Toll Brothers, Inc. offered sug- gestions it felt would result in a 11 "win -win" situation for them -- selves and the city on Tuesday i (see "Council, "page 3) Council located at the southern entrance to the development on Continen- from page 1 tal Boulevard. night. The council seemed pleased The developer offered to make with what it had been able to improvements to Continental work out with Toll Brothers, Inc. Boulevard that will include left- "I like the improvements and turn lanes in front of the entrance timing you've shown for the en - to the subdivision and Carroll trance on Continental Boule- Elementary School. The im- vard," said Mayor Rick Stacy. "I provements could be timed to have a big problem with the coincide with the city's plans and northern part, though —I don't thus alleviate some of the traffic ever want to see construction traf- problems. fic on Peytonville." Toll Brothers, Inc. said the Toll Brothers, Inc. told the project could be carried out in council it could save the city phases and could be planned to money by using private construc- begin as soon as school is out for tion subcontractors for the road the summer. This would help to work. The $160,000 the city will ease additional traffic. collect in impact fees will not be The first phase would include enough to cover the coat of road improvements from in front of improvements in the area. Carroll Elementary School west Council member Gary Fawks toward Davis Boulevard. questioned what the developer Construction traffic would was actually adding to the city, come from Davis Boulevard and since the city will need to pay for exit the subdivision through the improvements. industrial area west of the site and Toll Brothers, Inc. could not north of Continental Boulevard. give the council a dollar amount, —The .builder's .models_wi1L be.. —hut Sam the city might-exnect to - pay 20 to 25 percent less for road improvements if the firm con- tracted the work as opposed to the city having it done. Resident Jim Giffin, who in the past has opposed a zoning change for the property, agreed that con- struction traffic should be routed through the industrial district. Giffin owns lots in the district and plans to construct offices there. Stacy said he appreciated Gif- fin's spirit of cooperation. "I feel much better about these guys than I did a couple of weeks ago," Stacy said. He added he would hold out for a proper solution for access to and from the subdivision on the north side, near Southlake Boulevard. Billy Campbell, director of. public safety, has said that an en- trance to the development from Southlake Boulevard would not be safe because the road curves at the point where an entrance would need to be located. This curve would obstruct a motorist's view of oncoming traffic. PE NEWS CLIPPLNG 31 II Source: / V uN S i -T1 YY� e-s I Date: 10 — ` I -qkdl Ground -breaking ceremony Photo by Mike Lewis Depot store on Southlake Boulevard. Pictured are (from left) Scott Martin, Rick Stacy, uovaia zwverman, Ernest Boidoo, Mike Winkelmann and Bryant Scarbrough. a ■ r 31 AI u o *do CD >d d0 w'°O'yw"'"y °reC, r" BCD~ o" � •P< � o`•�e c � � � B � Ci7 9� 01 a o fl CoCD co rA CD N CD °< o � �•C' a� c� o aG g CDa�-C� .C7 cDy�cD<�c 0 O C"�.� .r. .BCD �-•° Wo z�' O b C .D-' o o o Orm P.- Inv CA CD A. D ° C C z fD C CD p. CD C. ?� ° O. y CD r BCD T�w w A Q ff 0 fn vR y+;y v vyR ' 7 WL C C R . _p C O O ^o y[pQ '>Q opb$CIS v°'=v ^O�Rp R vHnU co6.E&,0USb0 p O au - p U y C r. 'G .+ C w• x a c c a y v v To °a'E c0 a'�� a-o- E� ° a TK o �� 0 M. R u u a3 x c `yc ac R R R O O U �. C C a'C .�. �. [ O �. Q M v 7 .� y w C> N QQ n R R C h I^ C > p C y R C C ° t` Oa E O� c° y '0 x `cV cV g=s 3 os o ° R R ° c.roW " Eo a=_ cQ.�cc yti-ovR•`cywRa,°Ro .c3cmN,oc ac°,�*C; ao0E��c nE V o o .-, u MU v en "' R y v R R u c C o 'n y Q. J 'sZC �oQR' y VnU O.c •Ep cn c u uz O v o•O v'U �cRO 00.0-0 CA C�onO R CC x>° 'CCR on O a.— p 5 R O•- O EyC .0Ev+ cc p E pO � A$wcc Eo.oKVE°cv==.v c 0 o E R v n ccMoVci R� Ao R E y N ►. R `n �. 'O • i rn O y w • • k �..+ U Q v L.� 3 o R�t ° ° E= N v o a o 0— o �....,, v v cm 3 v�'o > a« •° a, a c�3ava��°°�•000.Ed=�oEo °� E v y- M R C Rn w ._. t p x O > y, V : ,L y O v '..' rn yy.. —• 'U R ; "' Vi U '�' 3 ..+ y pQ 'J R U •cq y lei y U 6R _> v v F C v R y R y C C I R >+ C i.. y O •L7 F„ O O C D •.. 'C >, C OD 3 •Oo U y y R Rai. R C �Or u. �,, O rA (A O 3 0. c—J E y i vNv�;a0''av a ac 0160 C lu y =� y0 R C 0 a p � -0 .= R 0 y y °)to y v G c -- y O a >, R y a -o .�+ ,, , a vi °v° y > �° R E a�i oEi °q 3 -M 'o L ',�. 3 p ca c°i °' 'd c~e 0 •`� 0 o 'ti .. 'ti o >,R - c >, i-d a>.'~� v R�v'o 0" = v v o•v 0 �3-0 = v ,. ow y 0 v a) O O u O y oo 3 O' N y y� �' v u oo C O' R "' y p m w> U '� n' �0, O �^ O s: ' y R R w, CcC v .0 y 3 i' w C >, O s. EL. >O CG C E O vO F E 'cO -w 00 O ww y oyco I. F C c� OCl,_ R co uRo FFa u E Y 11�4w!N t c 110E'J = O O �_ m • a: Y • > 7 y CO F 1 40 GNM 'N M5E9 Moo APe4S m i a U 00 a •fl Q . ai 0 p 3 G ti: �. �••R R R y 01 C. •� .0 �' C V OA " �"i y �� n C g C O N R Oa Zi Vy V p c>c y ice. C C rA L N yrr +... y y it •O a+ � '� � R. � a R y e � C c r, F• o0 m yCc y F E ,C e�C C y •b O 'b •� O Ca Vy ej o o�=Y[UQoo� U o E O o >> L M U Z R p. ono 3 0 c c_ y R oo ca c> E 0 0. U aC �_ vi C C w F L E L c Y Q�w c o R R 3 co �U o rA S7 O A A 0 O ` s. CAG O rr O O -p y O aN y oo '' R •., ... CA x yO .., R C p r+ y oo C «. y ,. O p Q M C �O, O C C/� V C C" '> >' O R > y o V CA v v R ° w R E y oou a�¢.. vo�ovv -o.ow oEvc�V vaA'pv y� ►.�.•:=onti� � w �,� O u v �, >,a>F ° E-•. a- R v c>cx�° O R «+ Q 5 ;L4 y > .S Ca cc PI Ic PI I 1 • NEWS CLIPPING Source: Date: Japanese dance troupe to perform in Southlake A dance troupe from has been performed for many years called the Okajachi Nanbu Kagura. Southlake's Sister City, Toyoma, be at the The dancers use colorful costumes Japan, will performing Sun & . Star 1996 celebration in and play with the quick tempo Their dance is intended as a Dallas and also giving a special in Southlake. music. prayer for the well-being of the presentation Ten members of the family, world peace, prosperity of for Toyoma Dance Troupe, ranging in in descendants, good fortune families, good crops, and the age from 40-68, will perform Sunday, prosperity of the community. The Dallas' Artist Square on traditional dance is handed down October 6, and then give an encore October 7 at 10:00 am from generation to generation. performance in the Carroll High School To find out more about the their auditorium. The troupe will perform a Toyoma dance troupe and performances. contact Shana traditional Toyoma dance which Yelverton, at 481-5581 ext. 705. �'ounci covers numerous items in October 1 meeting The city council met in regular session on October 1, to a full slate of agenda items. Mayor Rick Stacy opened the meeting with a recap of the events which took place at the city's 40th birth- day party, Sunday the 29th of September. He jokingly added, "I'll make it mandatory for (city employees) to attend ... I think some of them were afraid to be seen on the crochet court with me." Council member Scott Martin officially thanked the birth- day party steering committee and sponsors for their work. A SPIN report by district #15 representative, Wayne Haney 'lowed. In his report, Mr. Haney ed the increase in activity in his district, which covers most of the Southwest part of town. He also commended the council on their responsiveness to issues brought forth by his district. Mr. Haney concluded by saying, "SPIN is working." Four items were presented as a consent agenda and were passed unanimously with one mo- tion: 1) the awarding of a bid to seal coat twenty-three streets at a cost of $136,000 2) authorizing the mayor to contract with Cheat- ham and Associates for engineering and design of water mains along East Continental Blvd. and South Kimball Ave. 3) authorization for the Mayor to renew an agreement for ambulance and fire protection services between the City of Southlake and Denton County and 4) to proceed with funding analy- sis for alternative water supply for NE Tarrant County Regional Water Supply. A second reading of a re- . zoning request for Southlake Woods, located north of Continen- tal Blvd., west of Peytonville Ave., east of Davis Blvd., and south of FM 1709 passed on a 5-2 vote with council members Pamela Muller and Wayne Moffett dissenting. A preliminary plat for Southlake Woods was approved on a unanimous vote with the provi- sion that a north emergency access is provided. Toll Brothers, devel- opers of the project, plan on a main entrance off of Continental and proposed a joint effort between themselves and the city to make improvements to Continental to alleviate traffic problems, particu- larly in front of Carroll Elementary School. Work will be done during the summer so no disruption of school traffic will occur. All con- struction traffic for the development will enter and exit off of Continental to Davis to avoid undue pressure on Peytonville Rd. A second reading of a rezoning and concept plan for the development of the northwest cor- ner of Hwy. 114 and North Kimball was approved unani- mously. Strode Properties has sold the corner lot for a convenience store. At present there are no plans for the remaining lots. A concerned citizen, voiced concerns over safety issues and traffic problems at the high accident intersection. The agenda item passed unanimously. A revised concept plan for property located on the north side of FM 1709 and approximately 750 feet west of the intersection of N. White Chapel Blvd. and FM 1709 was passed unanimously. The plan calls for one building to be erected with space allotted for two more. The council tabled a pro- posal by Versailles, Inc. to build a private pool in the Versailles subdivision at the intersection of South Carroll and Bordeaux Court. The junior olympic size pool and other amenities were planned for a 0.42 acre lot. Council members were concerned that the plan put too much in too little area and that See Council, page 4 'B, r,L NEWS CLIPPING A IlSource: Sc�u �Yl��.Q �� C�re�SS Date: 1 — — 7 CISD invites Carmel Bay into district Carroll ISD trustees agreed unanimously to extend an invitation to the Carmel Bay sub- division to join the district. How- ever, it warned the residents of the north Southlake subdivision . to delay any petition to the State Education Commissioner. At present only three students attend Northwest schools and therefore, the subdivision of 16 homes, does not meet a complex ratio of property values to student enrollment. Parents present said that Carmel Bay would have to en- roll eight children in the Northwest (40.1 district to comply with the ratio, but said they would consider the board's advice. Board President, Buddy Luce stated that this is a unique situation and in no way should be construed as the district going after additional tax base dollars. In some cases, children living within a few miles of a CISD school are forced to travel up to 18 miles to Northwest ISD facilities. Northwest ISD board members recently voted down Carmel Bay's request, saying they would lose some $12,000 in aid. ■ f t NEWS CLIPPLNG 0 11 Source: '50XAAIA I Ck 4 YYV q %t 55 I Date: l 0 _ S" q Jo 11 Council meet October 1 continued from page 1 the location, the first lot in the de- velopment, could cause potential traffic problems. The council also denied a rezoning and concept plan for Cotton Patch Cafe, at the south side of FM 1709, east of the intersection of Westwood Drive and FM 1709. Concerns from SPl1l neighborhood 48 residents prompted the council to vote down the request. Appli- cant Larry Marshall said, "... we are making an investment in the com- munity and we want to be here." Bryant Real Estate peti- tioned the council to rezone 17 acres at the southeast corner of Florence Rd. and Pearson Ln. for eight single family lots. It passed. An agreement to trade 1.174 acres of city land for 1.584 acres of private land and $67,000 was also passed by the council. City manager, Curtis Hawk told the council that the land to be traded for is already being used for activi- ties by the city and is needed. Toward the end of the meeting, council members heard a report from Brian Stebbins of Rialto Development on updated plans for Town Center. Rialto has proposed that Southlake build their new city government facilities in the Town Center development. No action was taken. The council will meet again on October 15 at 7:00 p.m.. Mv A NEWS CLIPPING I Source: Star 7 I,A CA r(a YN-1 I Date: I Southlake Troupe from sister city to perform cultural dance A dance troupe from Southlake's sister city, Toyoma, Japan, will perform at 10 a.m. tomorrow at the Carroll High School auditorium. The troupe will do a traditional dance called the Okayachi Nanbu Kagura, in which the dancers perform in colorful costumes to quick -tempo music. The dance is a prayer for the well-being of the family, world peace and community prosperity. For information, call Shana Yelverton at (817) 481-5581, Ext. 705. s , 1 J MEWS CLIPPLNG 31 II Source: 4SfiQ, r --e � S Q\ r CA M IDate: 1 V (D q& I 0 \ E I" --PPP kr . Lost communities live on in street, business names BY jl) VlR(ill. AND Su%AN Giu. VARIH)N sw-Tcicgru SWr Wrncn InTexas, where history is measured in decades rather than in centuries, the past sometimes is comfortably familiar as old family stories. In Northeast Tan -ant County, place names and family naives turn up again and again — among them Tarrant, Birdville, Smithfield, Glade, Randol's Mill and Lonesome Dove. But with the explosive population?` growth in the recent past, some residents are concerned that the origins and signifi- cance of such names may be lost to the dusty shelves of libraries. "People are really starting to want.to know where they came from," said Betty Porter of Haltom City, who is helping establish Birdville Historical Society. "I think we are starting to realize that without Northeast Tarrant Coun- history, we don't have a future. We have to ty communities no longer exist as separate towns have a basis to grow on." but have been absorbed and annexed by larger, Porter is one of many area residents — some modern cities. Some died when the railroads old-timers, some newcomers — who have begun bypassed them, some withered away when nearby to set up historical societies and archival collec- tions to preserve the *area's history for future gen- erations. What they are uncovering are tales of courage, as perseverance and adaptability. Many of the original communities drew away business. But all are a part of the past and in some way shape the future. Bird's Fort In January ifs, Capt. Jonathan Bird of Collin County arrived with a troop t){ Rangers to establish a civilian fort to protect settlers from Indian raids. Bird's Fort was the first recorded pioneer settlement in present-day Tarrant County. The Rangers built a block house on the north bank of the Trinity River, south of present-day Euless, where Calloway Lake is now. "The Rangers came to protect settlers, but they also had their own reasons for being there," said Dee Barker of the Tar- rant County Historical Commission. "At the time, free land was offered to those who would settle within 12 miles of a military road, sir the men came for their free land." Not long after the Rangers arrived, however, a contract that the Republic of Texas issued to the Peters Colony Land Grant was extended to include the land upon which Bird's Fort was built. (More on CI'IYES on Page 12) ►' C��l nU P] P] WY) �-Yum osts ", (4w-,eCities From Page I Under terns of the contract, free land could be given only to settlers from outside Texas. ,o the Rangers no longer qualified. Bird abandoned the fort in the spring of 1842, but it was used sporadically by the mili- tary, including a group under the command of Gen. Edward M. Tar- rant. for about 10 vears. Dove The community of Dove is proba- bly best known for three things: Lonesome Dove Baptist Church, Lonesome Dove Cemetery and Ton - an Log Cabin. Found in what is now north South - lake. Dove (sometimes called Lone- some Dove! was settled by families from Platte County, Mo.. beginning in 1844. Lonesome Dove Baptist Church, the first in the area, was established in 1346 in the log house of Missouri native Charles Throop. A modern sanctuary now houses the church. "it was never a large community, really just the outgrowth of the church and the people around it." Barker said. In the Lonesome Dove Cemetery adjacent to the church — the oldest ;urviving link to Dove — are the graves of many Tarrant County pio- neers and officials elected to serve after the county was established in 1849. Nearby Dove Creek was a popular swimming hole and baptism site. Torian Log Cabin, owned by the Torian family and originally built along Dove Road, was moved to Lib- erty Park on Grapevine's Main Street in 1976 and is now a museum. Birdville Tarrant County was organized in 1849 by the Texas Legislature. which mandated that the county seat be named Birdville, presumably in honor of Jonathan Bird. "There was no Birdville before that legislation." Barker said. "The old Bird's Fun had been abandoned. and there were still some settlers, but there was no actual colony." Local landowners W. Norris and S. Akers donated a portion of their lands for a county courthouse, and Birdville was born in 1850. The courthouse was a tiny log structure built on the present site of Wiley G. Thomas Coliseum at Broadway and Carson streets in Haltom City. The colorful history of Birdville's stint as the county seat weaves fact and legend into a collection of tolk history. In 1355. Fort Worth tried to take over as the couno, seat. The Le!zisla- director of the North Richland Hills Library. "The railroad bypassed the town. so the businesses all packed up and moved next to the railroad track. Then a fire in IS90. which was prob- ahk caused by a ,park from the rail- road track. nearly destroved the tow n." Another fire. in 1929. burned every business in Smithfield except the Smithfield Feed Store at 8021 Main St. Todav the building is the home of Stevens Supply Co. North Richland Hills annexed Smithfield in 1958. Pilot Knob Pilot Knob. in southern Denton County. is the prominent sandstone hill along Interstate 35W between Fort'North and Denton, near Argyle. Originally settled in 1869. Pilot Knob's hill has stood as a landmark to travelers since before the arrival of pioneers. The outlaw Sam Bass is said to have frequently hidden in a cave on the hill. 'The community at one time had a schoolhouse with two doors — one for the bovs and one for the girls:' said Lynn Sheffield Simmons, a local author and historian. Over time, most residents of Pilot Knob moved to neighboring .argyle or Denton. In 1986 the land upon which the community had settled was bought by Ross Perot Jr. and all the remaining buildings were demol- ished. Bransford/Red Rock In its heyday, Bransford was known as a center of commerce and social activity. The community was originally called Red Rock, after the sandstone that was so abundant. In 1889. a post office that opened in Red Rock was named after Felix Grundy Bransford, a Kentucky native, captain in the Confederate Army, attorney and member of the 20th Texas Legisla- ture. The community soon took on the Bransford name as well, according to the book Colleyville. Bransford had close ties with the railroads, and in 1888 it was linked to Fort Worth. But Bransford could- n't survive in the modern world. "The closing of the Bransford Post Office in 1913 and the advent of highwav travel contributed to the decline of Bransford." reads the Bransford historical marker at 408 Shelton Drive in Colleyville. -By the time the city of Collevville %a, incorporated in 1956. most reminders of the hamlet called Bransford had disappeared." Jellico Robert "Uncle Bob" Wilson put Jellico on the map in 1898 when he got the L.S. govemment', appro%ai to open a post office in his genera; :tore along the Keller-Grapevinc lure allowed an election, anti one rivalry between Birdville and Fort Worth reached epic proportions. "The legend is — and who knows how much truth is in it — that Fort Worth brought in a bunch of voters from Weatherford." said Colleen Elliott of the Birdville Historical Society. "There were barrels of whiskev, and thev got the voters all slunkered up and won the vote." The county seat moved to Fort Worth in 1856. and although Birdville contested the election, the Supreme Court ruled that the elec- tion must stand, because "the Texas Le_sislature has failed to provide for an emer'gency of this character." Bird%illes post office was discontin- ued in 1906, and the town was annexed by Haltom City in 1955. Spring Garden This community, which had a 20- year lifespan, was founded by Samuel Cecil Holidav Witten. who came to Texas from Missouri to sur- vey for a land grants company. Witten settled the area in 1855, built a house and raised I l children, cattle and horses, according to Col- leyville, a book b% the Colleyville Sesquicentennial Committee. In 1865, Witten and his neighbors built a schoolhouse at what is now the northeast corner of Cheek-Sparg- er and Jackson roads in Colleyville. Thev called the school and the com- munity Spring Garden, after Witten's hometown in Missoun. The school turned in 1872. A second one was built, but the atten- dance never reached what it had been. A Justice of the Peace court was set up in the 1860s but moved to Grapevine in 1979. lending another blow to Spring Garden. The commu- nity disappeared, but an elementary school in Bedford bears its name. Smithfield In 1858, the Rev. William Turner and his wife, Mary, settled in an area that is now the northern part of North Richland Hills. They started a Methodist church in their home. and called the church Zion. The surrounding community took on the name of Zion until 1337. when the town was renamed Smith- field in honor of Eli and Sally Smith. The Smiths had donated land for a church building. "Cm;thfie!d has had kind of a wagon road. From there, the Mississippi native branched out — opening a cotton gin and a blacksmith shop in the com- munity where Southlake and Davis boulevards now intersect. "It was a blacksmith shop that was- n't operated by anyone in particular:' said Southlake resident Jack Wies- man, 66. a retired Continental Airlines pilot and amateur historian who has written a book on Jellico's history. "The farmers just came in, and whatever they used they paid him a fee;" Wiesman said. Wilson first wanted to name the community Burr. That was the name he put on his application for the post office. "No one seems to know why he chose Burr;' Wiesman said. "Maybe it's because of the cotton gin and the cotton burrs. Who knows? But Burr was taken, so Wilson settled for Jellico, the name of a town in northeast Tennessee where many of the community's settlers had lived before coming to Texas. Jellico died out after cotton prices dropped in 1907. Wilson's store closed in 1912. All that's left are the blackened stump of an oak tree that once sat outside the store and the remnants of a concrete vat where cattle were dipped for mites and other pests. But a Texas historical marker, put up in 1985 after lobbying by Wiesman, marks the former post officelstore site. Behind the marker is the Jellico Corners strip mall. Wilson and his wife. Sarah, are buried in White Chapel Cemetery, just down the road in Southlake. Other communities sprung up, thrived and disappeared throughout Northeast Tarrant County, each with its own story and its own fate. Some. such as Minter's Chapel, White's Chapel and Mount Gilead. grew up around church communi- ties. Others, such as Randol's Mill and Pleasant Glade, were the result of a particular industry. And still oth- ers, such as Mosier Valley, a commu- nity settled by emancipated slaves. boast a unique origin. Manv of the lost communities live on in the names of local streets and businesses. and some have even man- aged to maintain a degree of their original identity as a community. But all are a Fart of our past and c: nunue r� A r- b t� .Z H O C n f9 d A O 4 c IF a k O O v. C p O a O o `' � 3 o F.F ¢ 4, y,.., � • � i"" n U 3 C Cn n •l , y ri cz C •�. 7y. y ti• _ a C s c O 2.a LZ 4 r ''4 + •� •u• L 't V C NAW Cy y PC �,�' � � r a' � w. F•• , k � 'C � y c cn, R a= y ry HlF. . �'s Y � ri �• � CC _ rO � � 7k a L .N.r Q c m Y C 'W�Fi� �. r cz too w�•.+ T •L �'i y2 F3R ,N4vn YY Q% L'i ' � • :� >" '. y � '� CQ O ;� O � Y � c U N y y QO .� CC L U�•.' i p oD i C cp O w t. `�Oy� O G O m�� ; I-_ I.. cco3.> �. �, 's'* a r �„ •� O x y .c C. O y .y o w ... T «� O O —_ V ayi 0 •9 o ca" :.z �00 4k Via; p� �,. wyz a p L vyi � LL cd C T v ^+ 4" ccz ".' "� O C yca • y C �Y f ; a n 4 �° �Lr� V w C ,.pC y •� t Cl. V y 0 OAcz V ,t,+ 3 .f�a ,. o .p: C T V u •cC ca M '� »'-ytY ►psi A£ L 9 '$.�y a ►'• u R _ 1..'�3• 3 y -O y C V cz c E ^k a VJ n Fn a.I cQ i•r•/ .A9'� V.t .. v OIJ C; V>~ O m u y «7 O u C •T u O cC + 0. O n C 3 'O O � •;� �'� ^ = 3 o �� n.� 04 y ca y � cCC O y� y op ^v O :C .i o •�. 'C > '% L •� i i. i. p V U y N w C CLw 'C7 y 00 ca cC LL y c y y p ~C cZ •� y y G 'O co >> y C b = c.^ U y O oA y> C Y' c y oA a p C Q ti, c C O O y y cc y c u. C O ca E O > U S y y '�. = j s., .7 y A 3 E O U 7 C 3 R U y 0 y "G Q. c�C ty. > . C '... '.'"' C O .C+ y , i� •U O G .`^ C >, V w y y Q. �" y C ❑ p y v> •C ti. E y bq d C, T v1 c. G r C C, co N w O ... cd y. C� p C v T 7 C C t✓ -• 3 s c3 U= G' m- O op CO O y m > C c O0 C p 3 p w U V❑ c t y G- a> C 'G ca E c0 ^ .�~+ `.y. -o O. E ? y O c.� c.� y C_a ca R y o cca c �� i .Y=Mb y.� o o aE oya o � ¢ ��w� -coo�3 -p v C ca c C c O o •ca c0 p y> `` - C. o c Cs ytY:G y �L.c O Y c � !o aka N cca sae .`r '" 8 $ y w i NEWS CUPPING Source: — e e A Date: I C) To �l - ) O - N THURSDAY, OCTOBER 10, 1996 Tarrant County, texas 0 City of Southlake, Texas MEMORANDUM October 11, 1996 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Bob Whitehead, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Authorize the Mayor to Execute a Contract for Water Ground Storage Pump Station No. 1 (W. Southlake Blvd. at Pearson Lane) to Construct On -Site Piping and Appurtance; Pumping Support Structure; Install Pumps; Electrical Control Building; Disinfection Building; Driveway and Parking Lot GENERAL INFORMATION The Ground Water Storage and Booster Pump Station No. 1 is to be located on the north side of W. Southlake Blvd. (F.M. 1709), being just east of Pearson Lane. Foreseeing a larger volume of water usage in the upcoming years due to the continuing growth of the City, the establishment of the Pump Station No. 1 is a crucial factor in providing service to meet the demands. In order to have the facility on-line for the summer of 1997, Southlake Public Works Staff is "fast - tracking" the project and utilizing various sub -contractors. Our proposal is to award four contracts: I. 5-million gallon water storage tank a. City Council awarded the tank contract on July 16, 1996. II. pumps, controls, buildings, piping, and parking lot a. Staff will bring forth the contract before City Council on October 15, 1996. III. off -site sanitary sewer and water mains a. Staff will bring forth the contract before City Council on October 15,1996. IV. fencing and landscaping a. Staff anticipates to advertise for a bid opening and award it in early 1997. The second contract for the pumps, controls, buildings, piping, etc. was advertised on September 1 and 8, 1996. The bids were received, publicly opened and read on October 2, 1996. The City received a total of seven (7) bid proposals. 5A-1 MEMORANDUM CURTIS E. HAWK PUMP STATION NO OCTOBER 11, 1996 PAGE 2 1, CONTRACT II BID TABULATION The attached bid tabulation was prepared by Cheatham and Associates. FUNDING/FISCAL IMPACT Funding for the Pump Station No. 1 is in Capital Projects, Fund 758, 1995 Water Bond Projects. The fund summary is as follows: Contract I Tank Contract IA Change Ord. No. 1 Contract II Pumps, etc. Starting Balance $2,881,000.00 746, 680.00 184,220.00 1,498,500.00 Total of Contracts $2,429,400.00 Balance in Fund 451, 600.00 There are adequate funds for the expenditures of the four contracts Please note that Contract III will be brought before City Council immediately following this agenda item. It will be agenda item #5B, authorize the Mayor to execute a contract for Water Ground Storage Pump Station No. 1 (W. Southlake Blvd. at Pearson Lane) to contract off -site sanitary sewer and water mains. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the Mayor to execute a contract with the low bidder, Control Specialist, that is located in Roanoke, Texas, for the amount of $1,498,500.00 to construct the on -site piping and appurtances, pump support structure, install pumps, electrical control building, disinfection building, driveway and parking lot. Please place this on the October 15, 1996 Regular City Council Agenda for City Council review and consideration. BW/ls attachments: Cheatham and Associates Letter dated 10-04-96 bid tabulation sheet C:\W P W IN(#)\W PDOCS\WATER\TANK\PEARSON\CONT-II.BID 5A-2 CHEATHAM AND ASSOCIATES October 4, 1996 Mr. Bob Whitehead, P.E. Director of Public works City of Southlake 667 N. Carroll Avenue Southlake, TX 76092 Re: City of Southlake Recommendation of Award Water System Imp. for Booster Pump Station No.1 Public Bid Opening 10/2/96 Engineer's Project No. 001-518 Dear Mr. Whitehead: OCT 0 8 is-3 DEPI OF PUBLIC WORKS In review of the bid tabulations, it is our recommendation that the City award the above referenced contract to Control Specialists, Inc., for their low bid of $1,498,500.00. We have worked with Control Specialists on similar projects and we have found their work to be very satisfactory. We have attached the bid tabulation for your review. Sincerely, Bill Lohrke F:\WORD\SOUTHLAK\518-utility\AWARD.Control.wpd Enclosure cc: Control Specialists, Inc. P.O. Box 141 Roanoke, TX 76262 ENGINEERS - PLANNERS - SUR-kw VEYORS 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 5A-3 N LL O r H W W 00 V- Ln O O r O cn oCCo 0 0 0 0 0 0 of oc.)(Oo OD(nrnoo h- � (n 00000 o0000 0 0 F_a~Cl) c%)o ' UW U o0000 na00o0� 0 ~ FX-c(iMI Z (D lA fA (» (A (D O (� (� Z J N N 40 ' w --� U m w 000 o 0 0 a 0 O 0 7 Z LLj Ow elf zm F_(� 00000 606r6 (Da0� F- Za Uto<a: �a (n iQ moo a000a 0 F- o�o�p V N 000( (po O ' U too�ID ��b'i _ coN � co (D Z (D p CC)i O (A VZ (/► 00 00 0 U X p W O W LLI m F_V Jm JZ ' Za' 0o0acpO QOw=� �a (pO00) (n Ill aYatLQ o00o 00000 0 NN NC9 0OOO 0OtO pz o (p O (- (D (O Cl) N U W co 0 � U Z ' Q Z N (O N � � tO to Q X Z F- ao ao 6 w W Z W Ix co O iti m F_ V o (- to M UWQO F- ja (gm0=g CN0 N O NN O OOOOO O F- N co N O '~ O O O O O O Q NMMaD O - 04 If) cOv (AN 3, C o� o006%6% v_ I a.-X•-�� CO U CD J — W WIDOW V OOOOO 00000 m Za' OOCDN(O O��-(nN ZmQO �- i 0003: Do. v U a a a a Q S , Z aON O. F- (� o Z M J J J J J O W 0 05 H _ z Q U W ~ A w zaF-� °q z Z O cD a om Qz nLL�>w z a 04 UI-UF-2 W W WOO F: m gglLO� Q ¢ �a. p az0m Q w} QzU O ~ F- CO J> 0 - � O a 0 v) p4 a ,xw Oaf O ¢ O 0 W w 30 ~oo U u1 00 con(n Zzz 0 0 0 w w wE� O C)UU�� z ca Oz 3 w O O O F 5A-4 i 5 0 0 0 co T- LC) O O K 1- z w W O a E W U) p O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 p Cl � O 6% O EA O cfi O 6% O to p tq N O o O U N PL. W o q W a IX Z ! � Sa 00000 00000 0 0 0��0 0' CN 0) 0 OOOOO O ; 0 ' N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ♦- ti N U IN N 'OV O � to `'"�� N 'R p"a'NN6 ; G N CO •- W :ZxF- 00000 OOQw 0 0 0 0 0 U m in; f-V Z O0000 O- N O 1 Z N mn:gaa¢ O M H O ; 0 00000 0 0 0 0 O O W H O �' O1 ; (n 0 00000 0 0 0 0 O 00 O N N ; 0 Ct Cl) ^NNE ; U (o(DC-4—O M rnrn6,% Ow ~ U W ' Zco) w Og�ui ; F-V 00000 ooaoo m Z� ' Qchto0 I- �MWm ? Da McoN- co C9 c 2 6- < N N v O ; 00000 O moo 00000 rn0�to� o Z ►-uj mourn ; to co of Ocs � ooi o pQoac�.ic^° U ~ co -- j to f- he- Jwa 00000 00000 m' �>ROCTw Q-p tw rnomacn H ? w�gi � 5a LO sr�aaa¢ m z ; ;a sad ; N � co s s z � U � O fj) w w 05 fA a w F. ca w Q 0 z z`Lw� 0zgDC o LD m U 0 0 d H W w W W �2q=0 J a a Z O CO H F- W}QZU H O w w I- > 0 a Oa0 Of F- 0 w F- O F" p oo ¢ M U) w W Q 0 v, 1 - H F- > > w cn ZZZ�g U) U)0 0 0 0 0 w w Ci U H UUwW w F-z T O O �Zc�chV u� 5A-5 City of Southlake, Texas MEMORANDUM October 11, 1996 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Bob Whitehead, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Authorize the Mayor to Execute a Contract for Water Ground Storage Pump Station No. 1 (W. Southlake Blvd. at Pearson Lane) to Construct Off -Site Sanitary Sewer and Water Mains GENERAL INFORMATION The Ground Water Storage and Booster Pump Station No. 1 is to be located on the north side of W. Southlake Blvd. (F.M. 1709), being just east of Pearson Lane. Foreseeing a larger volume of water usage in the upcoming years due to the continuing growth of the City, the establishment of the Pump Station No. 1 is a crucial factor in providing service to meet the demands. In order to have the facility on-line for the summer of 1997, Southlake Public Works Staff is "fast - tracking" the contractor and utilizing various sub -contractors. Our proposal is to award four contracts: I. 5-million gallon water storage tank a. City Council awarded the tank contract on July 16, 1996. II. pumps, controls, buildings, piping, and parking lot a. Staff will bring forth the contract before City Council on October 15,1996. III. off -site sanitary sewer and water mains a. Staff will bring forth the contract before City Council on October 15, 1996. IV. fencing and landscaping a. Staff anticipates to advertise for a bid opening and award it in early 1997. Contract III for the off -site sanitary sewer and water mains will provide a gravity sewer connection to a City of Keller sanitary sewer main as per the Interlocal Cooperation Agreement for the Provisions of Sanitary Sewer Services. The proposed sanitary sewer main will provide sanitary sewer service to the entire 16.00 acre site owned by the City. The water mains are to connect to the existing transmission lines to Pump Station No. 1. This proposed contract for off -site sewer and water mains was advertised on September 1 and 8, 5B-1 MEMORANDUM CURTIS E. HAWK PUMP STATION NO. 1, CONTRACT III OCTOBER 11, 1996 PAGE 2 1996. The bids were received, publicly opened and read on October 2, 1996. The City received a total of eight (8) bid proposals. BID TABULATION The attached bid tabulation was prepared by Cheatham and Associates. FUNDING/FISCAL IMPACT Funding for the Pump Station No. 1 is in Capital Projects, Fund 758, 1995 Water Bond Project. The fund summary is as follows: Contract I Tank Contract IA Change Ord. No. 1 Contract II Pumps, etc. Contract III Off -Site Mains Starting Balance $2,881,000.00 Total of Contracts Balance in Fund 746,680.00 184,220.00 1,498,500.00 283,438.25 $2,712,838.25 168,161.75 The remaining balance will be used for Contract IV -fencing and landscaping. Staff anticipates to bid Contract IV in early 1997. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the Mayor to execute a contract with the low bidder, Saber Development Corp., Dallas, Texas, in the amount of $283,438.25 to construct the off -site utility system improvements for Pump Station No. 1. Please place this on the October 15, 1996 Regular City Council Agenda for City Council review and consideration. BW/ls attachment: Cheatham and Associates Letter dated 10-04-96 Bid Tabulation C:\WPWIN60\WPDOCSXWATER\TANK\PEARSON\CONT-III.BID 5B-2 IN CHEATHAM AND ASSOCIATES October 4, 1996 Mr. Bob Whitehead, P.E. Director of Public works City of Southlake 667 N. Carroll Avenue Southlake, TX 76092 Re: City of Southlake Recommendations for Award Utility System Improvements for 5-Million Gallon Ground Storage Tank & B.P.S. No.1 Public Bid Opening 10/2/96 Engineer's Project No. 001-518 Dcar Mr. Whitehead: OCT 0 8 19L-, DEFT. OF PULL(C WePvS It is our recommendation that the City award the above referenced contract to Saber Development Corp. for their low bid of $283,438.25. We have contacted several municipal references and several engineering consultants concerning the past work performance of this contractor. We have been advised from these references that their work was satisfactory. We have attached a bid tabulation for your review. Sincerely, Bill Lohrke F:\WORD\SOUTHLAK\518-utility\AWARD.REC Enclosure cc: Saber Development Corp P.O. Box 540186 Dallas, TX 75354-0186 5B-3 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 00 N O O O z m O N W Q U O C0 Q 06 F c 4 c F- E A O O O O O O S O 0 0 0 0 0 o O S S S S 0 0 j m O O p O O pO O Vl SNmmSm 0Q1 Am OO CR . WQ MbO Oh tmN0 0OH1c QOcmVl '�(N Nm ml1 7 HO N NO NO N /7 c7 NO mS AAp W N NtlOO mm_n NN00 b N P0O (p NAo NOO N Q Go N n ci ip Y a f-. w m W ��' O Q O O p O p O S S S O O O O S O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 O 0 'O n 0 cn - z i U 3 w 00 }Q( F i Z N m N ao N N co N N O N m N m N O O) Q co O 0 S O N S O e� n 0wi cn O a N c� 8 N O S 00 Q m N •'t co t00 N Q Q j� I fh N N O O O 8 m S m S n p O O O A S m h O 0 S S pp8 pp O O O e0- O 0 O 0 S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 S O S S O O O S S O O O N h : y YNI N N cA0_ cNo woo m em- p g Q O S W O t. (O N g S cm0 O S S S N r Q Y Ol A O O Yi M i U N N N N N N N H H O W 0 c� N A (0 0 .- A r N N A Na w m cNV cQo m h S n CIO N H H N H N N H N N N N N p A w N N N a N N y N N A ni N N N N N �qW> N X X o ~ W w Z . ♦- S O S N S m S O) 00 S S (07 S S O S S S O O O O p O O O S O O O S O 0 0 O O O S 0 O O O m 0 0 y O O F- ' Z XX N N N N N N N N cAV m^ h O O N N 0 S O cmO m Q S O N O cal O N N S 0 m O V N O N O O O 0 OQ. > a o a LL a l7 N O ^ O Q M 10 N 0 Q m p S SSS S SQ Q QS OpNO OO '00 S S SOONON 00 A mi W vNOv m cp A GI O Q_Wm m IA m W O '00W cm O Om OjQ 0 Q teaN 0 ^ N cw, aqmO mN m N Nm O N N N H NO Q b N W N N 00I Q O N N Q N N N N N rl x w 0 7 W m O S O O O O O O S S O S O O pp O O O O O p O S S pp S S m m Q m 0 O z i_ v 0 3 3 F . Z cO N m� N N m N M m 1� 1! Q tf p l0 VI m Q Q N O 1A O A S O Y O cn m O S 0 S 7 O a O m^ A 0 Q N Q 8 O S 0 S n' 0 0 0 0 a l'7 li a IL a -------------------------- C/ A .- m_ •O Q m O_ N 7 (n m S O O O S S O S O SO S O Q U m cn cy y Q N N O co A O c cV m ai p Q op aSS V S cV Sm m S O O SS O O O N .0 m VmNm ^ O O N u� /O Y N -O N Q'VQ _ Aco H NO NN O N m m M aNa O HQ N N NN H NN H N N N N H O p N A A N Q A m m > N N N O U~ W 47 ; W Q '-! O S S S$$ Q p S$ p S S p 8 S p S O O O O O 0 S 0 S S O O Q N W N 1� N O c7 1A N m N m N cG N pl N O co O A p 00 O m N R pp (7 p Q O S S N S XX N O N S Q 7= a N U001 Q 0 00 O 0 M m UOj Q p O S U)LLDdLL a N N N c7 N W 1 Z m N m lh N (n 0 m c0 O Q A A m m A V A C-4 A N N m Q N m Q) N N M 0 O N m 4� O Q Q S m N N d d Omf N N i f Z LL U: U: U: U:LL. LL. LL. LL. LL. LL. Q {L fn fA U: U:U: 0 fA LL_ li LL (L (n U) W W J J J J J J J 2 N 2 m N 2 c0 N t W a c4 `" U E E E m � a z 0 v, > vJ ; m o o E e a m r aZ n 00 0 g OF 0 0 ~ o m = 93 aaxxx�Fa- a j w >i www waa W www0 Z aO x j O a = w O O O O w W 0 0 0 O F J LL 0 v in O O 'ao o r •- e io e 0 W W (� z z a LU Bo V � ID o in .- i :� + m f 0 w Q W a d K w J z $ J J J J J J J co J J J J a d' m W .� z z d 0 U. J LL .J LL _I U. J LL J LL J IL J LL J LL J LL W } m d 2' a ~ w d d U d N J ~ > Y O Z U U U U U U U U U U Z W Y W W W W U U m FW- W z a d w > LL N O Q yF mmmmmmmmmm� LL z aLLaz�Fw a a a o - LL' U wF-F- W w w c0� .- wIxx 0 > w ui a LLi Q LLi LLi LLi LLi LLi LLi LLi LLi O m w O 0 `'' a z O a M � U U w W F- a O w F- (� M a LL a d a d a d a d a d a a a a a >- m x F- a~ W W F- W w ~ (� z z F- 0 w c9 z z O U N W wo F- ' U U U Q U U U 00 V U w z 0 c� N 3 Z w 0 0 0 0 0 0 C h >' F- N > m > a > m > m > a > m > a > m > a > m > a J O a Z(X W W W iN U~, -x W a O U c0 d a cD A A x Q. LL LL LL _Z ~ h >• Vl r> cfl c� N O N n N N N O tll O h M N 0 N Z F- N W F- _J F- _J F-- _J H — W F- J O O O LL 0 4' U V O F-- F- >>-- I- (n _ 0 a F=- m X w U U U F- V O F- U 0 O w_— H A W LL W LL W LL W _1. J O �� 0 U) 0 U7 0 U) 0 U) 0 (n 0 U) 0 U 0 U) 0 U) 0 V) 0 U) O w W >o> r. W 0 0 0 0 0 0 z zwd U 0 Q x 0 0 0 O (a vai N 2 - m o daadad¢¢¢ 0 0 0 cL D D D Z a �OQQ "c=ic=i0� Z D tii O O O O O p U U) - D LL' 0 0 a � O Z W Z Z g {- F- 7 io in io io w eo m m io io co io X W W x W x N N O .- O 0 U U) in "v w m ' N 0 Q F- F- W W X F- w O r m m O w O O Z N N N N N N N Q m O D W a0 5 B-4 0 0 00 C O O Z m O N F- Z CW G W O Q a W F- U) D ? N N N O] �i f7 A O O V 1� V n O m m O N O V O 0 O 0 O 0 N O O O O N N O O m N O 0 0 O 0 O V A 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O m N O O$$ p� O 0 0 m w A m M m O A^ m V CI N N A O N O N O M to n vOj O O N O N m m N m O fOD O p O m S aD O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 m 0 m 0 0 m O_ o Y aV O V a) mO U ? H w m H m w m w N e1 w V N n m N N N N m m N O N W m w to M N N M m< m N N an N m 0 at V N V N NIm N C n V V H O I a N ; N H H N H H N N H H H N N N N m w �{ N m N H H N A O 1 M A A n i Y! N C n X m m O F w /`�') N N O o m N o O O o o S o N O O pp O O O o 0 0$$ i N i K ad W m c m f- W Z U W m °' o o ,r m 0 m N m O O o O aA 0 N 0 N m N m com p O 0 N O O O N O 0 N O ' O O W=.= a N N In I O 1`m') Imo S cn i oac9aLL¢ l7 O N h i o 0 i v o n 0 0 0 0 o 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 o 0 o 0 o 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o g o 0 0 o o o 0 o o g o 0 0 S o O $ o C fpfpp O O N O O m amO O N am7 O aN0 N n m N O O pO O o N A O $ O O O Y O O O m O O O p O a7 O h O 0 O 0 O 0 O N b N o V o p A Ccs, i 2 n� O U H O N W H W O O N t7 h m m N V H r vi w O O n n N o m O O V m m" A N N O A 'T O N h r7 m N V N H Y m C O \ N H � a s H N w H w H an H N a0 o 5.o N N i U m m i> Ili W m o o o 0 o o S g o o o o 0 o 0 o 0 o 0 p g$ O O O S p O p g$ o o 0 o 0 O 0 0 O O p i W >O m Z z= _C O X F Q: S U x 7 d N N W fN0 V N N ci W N0 t N o O 0 O 8 O }QQp 0 O A ppS OI O O S OO O V O voi O 0 o N 0 o N N O O O m co) Q i 7 ag ZaLL Q N m N m N O ? it O i 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 O O 00 O O 00 00 p O p O OO O O OO O oo O o 0 o O O O O O O O lh ^ i i F N m N O m m O N O 0 m V m m A o m m$ O O p 8 N 8 0 010 0 O 0 co m 8 Op O aD 0 0 0 0 0 m 0 O of N O h O m O O SS i N m m^ l0 I O i H OD m aA H N^ H N N N t0 w l'� .- l7 M O O N 0 O A A N V 1A N p h A tm! m v0f S N N _ N r N m O A h m N m N m N 0 aD w 7 U 3 m C C N U H N N N N O N H H N H w N M N N N N N NN N M N N N N N O a7 m i m o A A A N N N N H N C m � O ' In E C W W O O O O O o 0 o o S p O O O O O p 8 O O O p S O S O O O O O O O O p O y U O Z U i N l7 V n c7 c7 m V m N O t7 V Cf m t`7 � V V V 0 0 p 0 O O O S h N O a0 V m O O p O h O O N 0 O o 0 0 0 0 j(� ¢ j a N N o N N O O t- O O O N /7 N $ i F f00 IL a lL i N n N N N N o o¢ i 8 i O O O A O O O O O co, O O oo * O O$ O O o o O O O O o O o o O O O O O o O m m W m 0 m V o O V N n A N m 0 m m m N m O O N O ^ m Y N O O V a7 N$ S O 0 p 0 S O� Ln N h Z N N aV N N m m O p O i V w a0 V H w N w w w w wi M N N V V w A a') N m w t� m H m V O M n A O O N A m o N O m N N N a0 a'l V o N N N aVp N m N m U A n^ NH H w w w 44 N H N N H V N H N N p N S w H w H V 2tnX.- N N Q I J C A~a0a° ai o$ o o o 0 o 0 o 0 o 0 o 0 o 0 o o o o o o 0 0 0$ o 0 0 0 o o io o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0$ o o U c w w I m> m F V Q • m O. O ; Z v M of fh /7 ri V vi O ') l'� m t7 o V of V ro V vi O o N r- O O O t0 V V O O S I m O O A m 0 N 0 0 o O 1-- Q. : �a �y O A rn an m o N N o p m N N 0 i S(, LLQ N I m 7 Z m N m m N O m m O V m n m m � V A N A V O N m N V N w m N N m (o "io m N m M m N Q I N m m m N fV0 N N F i Z LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL 4. a IL IL IL (/j (/j LL LL Q Q LL LL pj W w J------------- J LL J LL LC LL ui J J J J N N N .L. « r O i H U E m E „ E 01 m < i c o r a S o o m z �' a m > Z > o I J a 2 ., E o o ¢ � a' o< p ± p p m ?a U a xxx xxx¢ a c~i mm y W w O lu d W w W 0 z LL ►�- w i W O a W W O W F- -� O Z OG < pw. i s o c 77 w 0 a 0 cm � io voi w w Ur z Ix w O w_ a m ¢ J fn i O b y W m 6 � o 0 ' m O Q 'J a 0 4 _ W i V J J J J J io J co J Ix m Z Z ►¢- O m w i m I J J J¢ N w a r w a w d } Q I-' Q I LL LL Y Y LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL J m V a W a s >- R O U > Y O U U Y U Y U Y U Y U Y U Y U Y U Y U (� Z W Y w ui w w U m F- w z w w °' m�1 m 0¢ > z O i a¢ ¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢ mmmmmmmmmmm " a CLMCL=lob a a z tr w ¢ U o 2 I" w ui IIi a a ui m ui a ui ui ui ui ui ui m w JO O Op mmm W W o 0 ¢ Z O -ww - <' z tr z w o S�0W w ¢ O y 1- w i ¢ a< w U a a a a n. a a a a a n a m a a} a m x c> F Q W Q W Q¢ F z p N w 0 0 N m m otj = Ha UUUmUUUUUvUwZ > m 0m���3m� la?csUU �o0oZ i h > a a > a > a > a > a > a > a > a > a > a J 0 ¢ Z I-- w J J J N W w I o O- G i m m A } r i 0 Q Q } N N C7 t+I N l7 N N N to m N N In x Z x F (n W O~ . O I U U O ~ F LL LL LL X F— 7 0 0 W W� U 7 U 0 U~ 0 W~ O : n a uUJ J i - J __ J N Q¢¢ W J� 0 to to 0 N 0 to 0 to 0 to 0 U 0 to 0 N 0 to 0� U) a 0 W W O O O Z F- U O i Q (r c: I, O U O cn U U x w?� �� o d a a d d<<<<< w� o o a d d o Z¢ a �lcla o o V I O O O O O O O O O O O O X W W 0ON N ZO o .0 Q _'O O Z O Z Z Z K ~ L O m m tp lD m m m m m m m (O W io Q U to ' V r N O W W W WQ 1 W Z m © W O C] Q 1- < m I City of Southlake, Texas MEMORANDUM October 11, 1996 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Bob Whitehead, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Authorize the Mayor to Execute a Contract for Installation of a 20-inch Water Main along E. Southlake Blvd., from S. White Chapel Blvd. east to Miron Drive GENERAL INFORMATION The City of Southlake Water Utility Master Plan demonstrates the need for an elevated water tower in the southeastern quadrant of the City. Taking in consideration the glide paths to DFW, it has been a tedious task to locate the elevated water tower. With the acquisition of three acres in the Miron Addition, the tower location is now finalized. The construction of the tower is scheduled for the FY97-98. As discussed with City Council at their retreat and the budget session, a 20-inch water main needs to be extended eastwardly along E. Southlake Blvd. from White Chapel Blvd. to the Miron Addition. This will be in the same vicinity as the site for the elevated water tower. The 20-inch water main would provide the volume of water to better service the growing southeastern quadrant of the City and provide the volume of water necessary for the Village Center. This proposed contract for the installation of the 20-inch water main was advertised on September 22 and 29, 1996. The bids were received, publicly opened and read on October 9, 1996. The City received a total of eleven (11) bid proposals. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS For this size of water main, types of pipe are limited. The City's other 20-inch and larger water mains are constructed with a "concrete cylinder" pipe. Manufacturers of a comparable pipe, ductile iron, had indicated to Cheatham and Associates that their product was now competitive and available. Thus, we chose to bid both type of materials. On the following bid tabulations, Alternate Bid "A" is concrete cylinder and Alternate Bid "B" is ductile iron. BID TABULATION The attached bid tabulation was prepared by Cheatham and Associates. FUNDING/FISCAL IMPACT The FY96-97 Capital Improvement Projects Budget included $750,000 for the 20-inch water line along Southlake Blvd. Because of the numerous amounts of utilities located in Southlake Blvd.'s right-of-way, easements are being acquired in which to place the 20-inch water main. 5C-1 MEMORANDUM CURTIS E. HAWK 20-INCH WATER LINE OCTOBER 11, 1996 PAGE 2 Therefore, some of the funds will be necessary to acquire the easements. The funds for the 20- inch water main and easements will be taken from the Utility Fund with the Utility Fund to be reimbursed from the future bond sale. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that City Council authorizes the Mayor to execute a contract with the low bidder, Wright Construction, Grapevine, Texas, in the amount of $540,231.50 (Alternate Bid "A") for the construction of a 20-inch water main along E. Southlake Blvd. to the Miron Addition. Please place this on the Regular City Council Agenda for October 15, 1996 for City Council review and consideration. BW/ls attachment: Cheatham and Associates Letter dated 10-04-96 Bid Tabulation C:\WPWINlA\WPDOCS\WATER\LINE\?OI-1709\BID-PRO.M FIN 31 5C-2 CHEATHAM AND ASSOCIATES October 9, 1996 Mr. Bib Whitehead, P.E. Director of Public works City of Southlake 667 N. Carroll Avenue Southlake, TX 76092 Re: City of Southlake Recommendations for Award Water Improvements for 20" Water Line N. White Chapel Blvd. to the Miron Addition Public Bid Opening 10/9/96 Engineer's Project No. 001-432 Dear Mr. Whitehead: As advertised, bids for .the referenced project were received, opened and read publicly at 10:00 o'clock A.M., October 9, 1996. The low bidder is: Wright Construction Co., Inc. 601 W. Wall St. Grapevine, TX 76051 We have checked the extensions and total and find the proposal to be in order. Therefore we recommend award of the contract to Wright Construction Co., Inc. in the amount of $540,231.50. We enclose a bid tabulation for your use. If we may be of further service in this matter, please advise. Respectfully, 44111-6 4��4, Robert Rowley, P.E. F: \ WORD\SOUTTiLAK\432\contract.awd.wpd Enclosure: Bid Tabulation cc: Wright Construction Co., Inc. 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 MU :r rrF_1 rrW_, x C/7 A. rl 0 0 0 O CD I IO iO 0 0 0 0 0o000000000000000CD 0 0 0 0 0 0 O'O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O I0 O po p U O ��M on0 Z? O^^ O N 1 C OOOO00000000(DOOIn0 N (D O O N O U N to 00 000(D V 00CD � to 00 O (DO ^ 0 M O N N In In (n N N f- (D O O (Ni f� O N 7 V O Un (!') (D N '- f- N W In N !D O M(DCO O V cy O Q) C° w f" `n (V (n M(nM (n 1n (n tO !n 00 U) NNN (n M Vn V) M VOi .-.-- rn .-- M (D co O W N w CO 0 Q m Tj O O O f- o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 09 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 0 0 0 ' Cl) U- Q) m m YQQ_CO '( .,� O (n00000000000 V VO0000000(Ooam7�2;:-" OOI- N/-- -NON OON• - CONO 00 .- a m lL NNM MN Q Q It �r 0 tO V 0 0 (D COCO0 0 0 M 0 O 00 O o 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CD ? T f\ «7 = ✓: n O N OzOZm 000000000000 O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 to 0 a 0 N 0 000 0 0 0 to 0 00(D(Da 0 0 c p 0 0 p O p N m O N Nn0 U^ t11 v r` to N O to O w m O(7) to O M(D O f`()o to ^ Z �Nm Z e- C/) cn (") U 00 M O Cl) ('')(0ir- .-- 006V () V V'-1 � N(DN��MV,I- N N b9 64 (p /n O O M 0 Z (n 69 (H w EAk (n ( n NJ t0 -jo)rn U �� o00000000000000000000000CD omom00000000000000000tno.-o Jm0 �� C) F .- � U O o 0 0 0 0 0 U ^ 0 C m m f `x � O o O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 M 0 o V' N.- O UO O O O t O O N N c0 0 0 O LL FAQ C E E � zO ZMaMo.7--toNNtO- NM 0)(") UO ��uQ-LL Q Q Cl) 0�00 Qc000 o000000000000000000000000 0000CD000000000000000CD00o0 0 0 F- M N0t17 fZn 5.'-1-CjC6 V O) UOM N E-. (/] O(ri0000000000000LOao0000tri00 0) 'IT 00000000 a o N 001- 0V0QNOt-00 0 O' o to (hN LO O N 1.1-0(n(0L(Da000-OOtO1-vM(00 EA EH Nt1J CD N O�.",N � ° " N N CN -1-0% �CO(A 6464M 0Oj .M- O_ N tO�_-(A 69 � W O^f Off � � !A 69 b9 69 fA 6A V� 6q v► Z J c 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 j Q D �Q (;,� H U 0000000000000000000000000 ODo0000000000000tOOc000 W O J C m m z c M M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 D M N 0) M N C) O V'NO�O N O UoOiQC cxD E E '� CL. �p^jN00tOtO(OtO.--ter- O(O O �(")OQ.LL O O �T t�l Ln 0 O (O O o O 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 O O �UOtOtOM(") NN(V N 000000000otomtn OCD O D) O M O O to O O O O O O N t (') V O c00oNOMLO00f-c00 O O O O O O O U O 0 0 t o Cl) O 0 o o M -fint_0(0(D UO M O M N v w(00 (D'IT ITOM(O LO_ N N f�,- O(D E•• F_ �T Q to to O U 0 M V'(D N N N t`f`f_ (n Cl) (A 61) (A 69 C%) 'T d 69 _7�64 N FA N9 61 69N 69 M 64 c+o 69 69 O tD (/) ^ ^ 3 (p 69 69 (ri 61.1 Efl to Hi to (O OJW0"' CO U Q Z00 Q m = W -0-0E., (; ] oo0a0000ao000o00000000000 O N O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 v 0 o 0 a Q) � m C . U MNOOOOOOotO00) M V'OOOo000NtOt-0 NM4C60MOO V V - oM. U-)00-O - 0 ��Ur o E E U- a NNo^O(MUOaOC\j N (D V tO .- Q Q Z LOUO- �--tC)I��� V (�O(OtOOLO00 . F N� nOOLOIC MNM(0 co F F ti J ti lui J J 6 uj J J QQQcnQu:titiiiu W W W W W J J QQLi(n}u:vi co q _j J J J J J W W J U J J tL� Q a0 Z U) N N t _W �= U) J U) Z U) (o (h LU F- W Z Q (D Z cn U) (D Z Q N tri N 3F v,0u-, (j)W( a m N> X > W W W W (n q W W Z q=q } Qcn O H H z> WM w a�XQm� Of wr-QZ=WQ'W� NSW WQZw lb ww OW0WOJwz W>0<M<M U) 0 >wO> Z .. a. 10 O zWzW~W>zv)JOQ J W JW Z�W.�QOUtX; U Z N Q Z � uX >�Q J>M F- W � c m c d >aZOQ�LL� O (y U a v) U0U00 WQOQF O W O F-JQ� QWF-WHO W Z (n Q Q W x O W W WWUF- W W Q~Q>N��O� J O_ O_ O W �rcvi ^^ �- E- W W W JWJQU)00< W W 0 Z W ZWZ LLQZJ~� U)W ~> QQWzF- W }� F- cfl m i U F- U F- ~ F- E- co W O O J O W Z J 3 z u z ODO�O_-N C)zOz w wZQQOm�m No N )WW = <w F-OU ��LLO QU Q 0 0 0 D Z _J U)U) _J .- O Dm O N� OHO O W ::) C) } Q W W W=Z J Q J Q QQQ� W W� ��F-F- W F-U-U = O Q Q F v IC14NUN Z W WZF-0Zz0z0W LUWw6EO�wO O O O O N O O O O O N �UUNUUUUU O - O 00 O O (yCL ���LLCD �_ - (DUUF-- J W' � aY W f •- Q m M - to (D n co O O .-- N MLLLII Me �I v tO r� p 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 ii7 �O UIO P 0 O 0 O 0 CD 0 CDOIO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 O (D (DO O O O Co O (O (O �o to0 c+j�OM :-. s O •f 1�0 rn 00000000 O O O Otn 000(D to00000000000000 O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O to p p x N N `r 1= r N C J �o f-- V_ O O V O 1� O to O of Q) N O (D N n r (D O vi tO (O n O N V O •-- V to N (D O V N O co to M (D M M O W 1� 000 to F, rD 00 O ar a) ti th M _ (�(� '-L7 ♦_ Z f\ f\ tp r- to fn to (7 N M M (n N (n N(n M to to to to V) V) to to CO NN In to N(n to to to NN N V! r r nj � o) Q O Qf O to to In Z k= Q m O O P- w 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 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 to 0 0 0 0 0 0 U Co O Qj D J C CO m ' U 00 V U.) V O 0a00to000tototoaOrco,Nrotor O O O O O O O to O O O O O O O N r O N r O O 000 E E 000M V r-tn c00(DM rN a"Nr COM V Wr LL lL Q Q N N N ►+ r ^ O L o to t 17 O O O O O O O O O O 00000tC0000(D9r-00 O O(n OA« O CD_ O O O O O O t) O O O N)00 to OO) ^to ^(V V) ONCAOa r-to00to0 0r- V r- Oto(DOOtO6LO 0 M to Oto tTOM OOONNOMtpO a 00(D V V 0MW O tti 00 J r_ N r t() CCMN O U to r CD�tnMmn r to - (D f` r- r�tb to N V tTOto (p D) M D)M r M r Q)�r(n�o(D N .- M 0 r (D o (D r r to U �. �. N M r- N N (V (n N to Y) t!) (A M to N V fA W to MO W M co N CI) O O) ^ w to N N vi ( IT w (A to (fi Ffl (A b9 eA to EA tq 44 W n r O O O O O O O I O O O o O o (D (D O O O M O V O 0 O 0 O 0 N V t n O t o C O t O M O O O D ' ZmY C co ca QOU U Mr-to00 (Dto000Mrf'-Or-too0t-(DOMM O V 6MNOtnco6 V (OtDONr.--►�00 0(DN Co Ot m a nLO Li�f`too N M r rM (O o Oa�Q- LL QQ UV N (o CI) (1))0 to O K 010N 0000000 toNoa000000000000000000000 a 00000000000000000 O to to C0 ^0N CO ' ~Nr" O' O' cDr- V_M (nQ)x [� (n N M tT r00000too000000to000000000 V MOO 00a00N000or00(D0N0aLO W 0 M a N to N t` V. t�0 t\p o V O O f`M(D On v n vt70 P- N to V vv(D tn(D to Z N F� O N 0 U C0 � m C�7 U%m f4(A�c 69M O c07609y�9�N t+0)to N � to (A GS b'! FA r 09. co Ow(a W O to O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 1� Q a1 (� t o f` 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 J ca m U to O to00000NOOOr..MT o 0 0 0 0 t n O 0 0 o t o 0 0 M r-- (' 7 O O t n O .99 O r O �O-J Gi 00 VOOMCD to Orr co (DtoOr M Mr V V N o to E E (�NQ�LL Q Q G. Mu')vCDr MM NN (v O O er er to to o O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 to 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O O Ur O �� V Q) [� Otn0000000MMCIOLOONtn00(Dtoo V C0 V o(Dm to O i- �toNt` cn MMvao wtn0cop qp Ntr V V 0r�wLn NM(DM V V mNN00 to tn(DW V r(DOr-cm0 V V M M 0 eV- N MCtiC6C (") (O CO 00 r- O r�OMtoM(DO �UOCON(n(Dt70o(D II-: -,iC O_ V M e~- CO J i O O co co 0 0 ^ ^ U to M to M M (A M (A W V (fi b9 69 to (A V dA to (R r (A to N b9 (A to 69 r ffi FR (ri CO tD h (D (D ^ ^ CO00 !A (f! r. 00 ;QX Qm oo000o0OOO000000oa000tno0o F O W o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 o t o t o 0 0 0 t o r- O N 0 �cci ai m U mr-0000000CVM V*MmM'ItM"6(Dtri N CM NM C Q V V V(Dto V VOV V tna)0)r-VMNNNV r N V r M O_ _QQ� (co E LL Q Q LSr MttOO(+M70)Mr MM NN V �+ tnto r rtnITIV (hOtDtnOtnOOr rOOtnOr N NhrNNN V rNOto V MOr�aO tNM� O (U(i(n(ntnQQ-:eC6 J J J J W W W w W ILL ritiliriLL:L QQlicn} u (n E AC J J J J J J J J J w W J m 6 J J a W z U ") N ") N z z O a (n C7 Z fn CI) M w (, E- Ur Zc)Z Ur N m Q w x z Q v,Ov-, a m �- w O C) N U)000 (o Cl)o W w U, w w U fn w HQ w n zcn�0 n-wF' a20 p H H I�t Z W (� wco n' Of n-r I— XQm~N w>aaC) W < W z =Xocr W W >} >>' pi M Q m a O w w LL O}� w wzvj0w0 w >�O> z w z .-i w aw. �tZOtl�LLwZUnJOQmQm Q'W-J w (6 to [x Ow o1 }aJazF Q�wj Z(vZr Ogg>n ~ W U) m M O aU o; U0U00 Z�ZZm >�zUQ°60O0600 d W W _j-J 0 106 z U) Q Q 0� v) L(7 r. LL F- L7 z O W H-H- W�UH Q~F W Q QOQ~ U>NC,F-�F- QW~wcr-0 _>U)> W X J O C_ 0_ O W x N Cl O W W W w W W Zotyrw(nw(n �ZOfz (lQZJ~-wi QQwzF-F- rr m co Uf-Uf-~F-F-Om��0000 -i�JQ(nCDZQ Z O m m (n<� <0z>��Owz F- H O Z O�O U Z U z O z - z -N Q Q No U U Q W 1-- ti U) Q 0 U g g U C U r) Z J .J � 0 coO � N C N O � D Q LU� C Un �� W ►7 % E- C QQQQ� W WF (n J �E (n HILF-LLU"U}UU) (n (� > Z Z = CD U O E F- hrl Z Z�Uzzwz O Q Q Un (n O O ►4 ; �- Q W - o00000�0�_ - - 00000�00�- CLQ-Xoo(N ���� DWO H H- .� N N N N U N U U N U U U U U - = E (D (D Ulu F- W C "y • C Q m m Q CI] (M V to (D t` a0 G) O - N M N N r N N N N U z a H 0 N Cl) F W U O ►Nr N (u CD 0 0 0 0 (D 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cl CoCDOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO00000Ioo 0 � 000000000,00000000000000I00 � en V) V ev) u). V) V) (n � 'n V) en U) V vV to to � V) V eV) n 0 w 0 v► o M Q G � �C3 o ZC3� Qm Q M m m W U W m c55 ct) e E_ a ►� p n to Cl) O t) N � 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 CD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O h '-CtiM m p�0000000000000000000t1')CDO m M .-�'r o (O (p Cp O E. Cn O co W 0 0u)000LO(Dtnov_000000Lio W LO LO N 00 M O CO N t) (D 00 to O (D Lo O 0C,i O (D v v O O o -j I,- NNOrn C] Z(DZt--r-O(n(1)047 O�M_CONr')N(Dcl)(D(r) LOC) Z O) TQ]OU C)(�NN ( �.- 69(n O(D teW r` � N U r- — O - v en !n A( CO 69 6A (n 69 613.6q A 64(A(AN to (7) V) to 7 U��0o4DZ� m�m9OO0000000000oo00or-().-c �OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO O(ri000to ()ONO -r.-0 W 4i C m U 0 v toot I'- 00(" M(DNOMN� (ri(riooi0ri(Dv)to00CD "mm0Q)aOMNr-(Dto -r O _ _ l �O� C Cx9 F r G. Z ZI- Nt) NNMM Ch(D rl- Q(`')WLl Q Q N N Cl) Cl) O L O o 0 0 0 o O O O O o O 0 O O co 0 0 0 0 0 O •-p N m O�D000000000000I�000000()00 m N O O' 0a 0 0 0 a 0 0000MC)00Oo0N00NN rhNM- W Op 0Z M zz0(A LO (o0t)CD0M-DOlhvt)N0to00O - 0O ZN(Z) Q�N C)a a 1 ) N T M 6A IT r 64 A 69 )f(D(D( 01-64 cli tt cli O� � 69 co CO . — M to o 69 (fl Go). 6% co rn Z W w�0) Z Q m W 0 0 O— 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 t) f` 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 t) 0 t) 0 O 0 O W Z CO m Y C U m o (D vO000oo000CDD)vmN--Oo m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o t) 0 0 0 t) t) O o 0 0 v N f l-- 0 0 U00W ° CUE E a z zMr`))`)m-N��ctn.�'- ")") tO Cl)) oZUkLL C) ol �p000 OOOooOOOooO0000000000000o 0000000000000000000000000 0 Cl 0 0 4 t)(3)�MM p O p CD M G. `cn U-)oco00C-i N Q) O O M tl) r� ri v r` n tri t) w CO r- v O 00 v V to 0 N O M 00 o IT r-000OO O (V t) 0 t) 00 co 00 00 (D (-i M t) CO 0 0— cr f,�N t)O O M r�C4C-; M M M ) (D C) W CC; V ( M t- 0 M 0 O 0 CO C) (D My-(d N CO 0 (D 03 -tn�0N (D r-- N (V CD t- O (jJQ V'ON0 U tf)MNN co V 69 Ul 61) --69 69 (A fn t)0N 64 64 V), 69 69 69 6469(A 00 u) b9 t) C14 M O Cl CT w N N 69 1 Q Q m W O O O O O O O O O O O O O O -r- O O O O O O O O O O O Cl o O O 0 O Cl O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0. O 0 Q. m m m` ;� triWMMMui. tci"Mvv .-CDv0r;oftci--(DCO C Yco O k CL 7�00 M t,- "n t)^ v(D000NN—CONN CO CD M Q O) (7 lL Q Q 0.. eQ)�M0P-.M-Mh-(NCD N N Cl) � u � ��- V M0CDOOu')0o v NC) )v Mor-co z a N f-. NNN ICICILO0N (NMI 0 F J J W W W W W F Qn- J J J J J J J J J J J W W J m U J J zz a o w z f„ N N fn _Z (n Q (, m w ^� (D F- a ZU)Z_ fn (D N N 3H J Cn O (n a m W oNo 0 cnW� w w ;Nww U� > W �"� U U cn >- w X w viCa E.> 0.Z�>X U) 'o U)U �- 0ID am O — w IQIi U z wm n d W�w>.aU-aw=�o� wQ�m � a m O W W w ww }mow J Z H> wz Ow0 >�zw J (D Z w m d a > O Za w O ZdZ�>Z�JUUOUN W w O Q 0 a m a m w O>~aW W Q> H N E aC. C/] ¢ rn Q Cox r } Z> ZZmQUW>Q J x wN W C)0 Jed a cn m d .. y O aU Z U0U00 >dzUQ060060 JJ<0 Z (A Q a W C�wWUHwQOQ~ Q~H�>N�F-�F- QWFwW 0 J c. E w i O wx� q _O I--�— wwww�wQ z �w ww (n =>�>ww a¢z-i -w}w O O_ m 0_ m G O ) JC -=- Uf- J-j , �-f-0cn Z Q� Z O 0 0 w 0 0 cn��QQwZ�� <0Z>� �0wz O CA zuzuzzz O�O�O'-�wNOON QQ CO O U m Uw- - QW ~11-0 a a U OUO Z �( 5 -N0�0aUU) W'(N Xa���Q W O O(nU J J QC 1 W 0 Cd .� a Q�QQ� LLJ�JgF-f-'�~w>zz= m QQ�(nZ0 O o=LO W —Z a F- a F- ►+r Ga o c OOIDO�C 00;0 oO z o YcnW NO zr=ZZ(nz(n O(n(nH�F-dW _ OOOOONOO�- aawoo�J�w0 W JM O O .r N,U iN .-U UN UUUUU�-- c l!_(D _ CD UU!-,W O I I! � O Q L" •1 m C7 I t` C� O O N M V u7 (D r- CO C) I O N N N N N N I City of Southlake, Texas October 7, 1996 TO: Curtis f E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Shana Yelverton, Assistant City Manager SUBJECT: Agreement with Public Management Associates for Citizen Survey You will recall that we previously provided information to the City Council about the need to gauge citizen opinions and ideas city policies, programs and services through an updated general citizen satisfaction survey. The City of Southlake conducted a similar survey in 1994- 95 (see attached), and committed to looking at the data regularly. We meant to update the data once every two years. The survey is intended to be the first step in developing a strategic plan for the City, and will provide an excellent mechanism through which randomly selected citizens can communicate with the City. Public Management Associates has been contacted to provide a proposal to serve as the consultant on the project since they conducted the previous survey. They have submitted the attached. As you will note in Section IV, Dr. Glass and Dr. DeSantis, who are on staff at the University of North Texas and will serve as project adviser and project director respectively, have extensive experience in working with local governments to conduct general citizen surveys. Please note that the proposal design provides for a 600 respondent survey, for a +/-4 percent margin of sampling error at the 95 percent confidence level. The sample will be generated by the use of Random Digit Dialing, and all responses will be confidential. The cost of the project is $10,500. Staff requests authorization to enter into an agreement with Public Management Associates to design, administer, execute, and analyze a random sample survey of Southlake citizen attitudes and opinions. SKY Attachments: 1995 Citizen Survey Proposal, City of Southlake 1996 Citizen Survey D-1 x SOUTHLAKE CITIZEN SURVEY 1995 Prepared by: Victor S. DeSantis and James J. Glass Public Management Associates 500 Mimosa Denton, TX 76201 817-565-3221 May 10, 1995 Southlake Citizen Survey - 1995 I. INTRODUCTION roJ w During the months of Februaryand March 1995 a citizen survey w s y as designed and administered by Public Management Associates (PMA) for the City of Southlake. The 1995 survey is the first multiservice citizen survey conducted for the city. The results of the survey provide the city council and staff with a data base that is representative of attitudes of the citizens of Southlake. The information identifies the extent of municipal facility use, citizen perceptions regarding various aspects of city performance, and the degree of citizen satisfaction, or dissatisfaction, with city services and life in Southlake. The analysis of the responses and differences among the respondents' replies should help to identify those areas where expectations are not being met or where dissatisfaction has been expressed either by the citizenry in general or by identifiable segments of the population. The report is divided into seven sections: introduction, methodology, sample characteristics, city services, citizen information, quality of life, and conclusions. J Public Management Associates 5D-3 Southlake Citizen Survey - 1995 2 A II. METHODOLOGY A simple random sample was selected as the most appropriate design for the study. To obtain a representative sample of all adult residents with a +/- 4 percent margin of error at the 95 percent confidence level 600 completed interviews were needed. A total of 606 useable interviews was obtained. PMA's trained interviewers administered the survey. Training for all interviewers consisted of three basic elements. First, interviewers were informed about details of the survey. Such items as the reasons for doing the survey, the concept of a random sample, and the administration of the survey were discussed. Second, telephone interviewing methods were presented. The interviewer's attitude, methods of conducting an interview, interviewing problems, and standard procedures were covered. Finally, the trainees were familiarized with the questionnaire. Each question was discussed and the specific instructions on the questionnaire were explained. The interviewers were provided with written material on the interviewing process, and they were instructed to conduct several practice interviews. The survey instrument for the 1995 survey was designed after consultation with the city manager and staff. The instrument used in the 1995 survey was based on ideas expressed by city staff and on instruments previously developed by PMA. In future surveys, the 1995 instrument should be used as a base so that comparisons across time can be made. Public Management Associates Southlake Citizen Survey - 1995 All interviewing was conducted from a centralized telephone bank in Denton, Texas. An experienced telephone supervisor was on duty at all times to supervise the administration of the sample, monitor for quality control, and handle any other problems. Shifts of interviewers were used throughout the day and evening, both weekdays and weekends. All telephone numbers in the sample were tried a maximum of five times, using a rotating schedule of call-backs to ensure that a number has been tried on weekends, during weekday evenings, and during the day. In the telephone interviewing the Computer Assisted Survey Execution System (CASES) version 3.6 on IBM personal computers was used. CASES is an interactive computing system that allows on-line interviewing and continual data entry for each respondent. The survey questionnaire is programmed into the system; interviewers then read each question as it appears on a computer monitor and directly enter the respondent's answer into the computerized data base. The software automatically takes the interviewer through any skip or branching patterns in the instrument, eliminates incorrect response codes, eliminates the need for separate data entry, and allows for frequent tabulation of data as the survey proceeds. The need for editing of surveys as they are completed is minimized by the use of CASES. The software eliminates response codes that are not in the appropriate field for individual questions. Despite the reduced probability for error, printouts of survey responses were reviewed to ensure that additional editing is not necessary. Using the latest state-of-the-art statistical software (SPSS PC+ 5.0), the raw data file was analyzed. A sample of cases was checked for accuracy and any Public ktanagelnent Agotiates 5D-5 Southlake Citizen Survey - 1995 4 discrepancies were corrected. Complete protection and confidentiality of the survey data base was assured during all phases of data analysis. Access to the data base was limited to the project team. The same statistical software used to check the data base was used for data analysis and generation of graphs and charts for inclusion in the final report. Frequency distributions for each survey question and demographic characteristics were developed. Cross -tabulations of each question by selected demographic characteristics (age, length of residence, owner/renter status) were then calculated. The data are presented in tabular form with some descriptive comments and only preliminary interpretation and evaluation. The objectives are to secure overall citizen perceptions and to identify particular concerns for detailed evaluation by city officials. The analysis of the data involved two steps. First, the observed frequencies or percentages for each question were calculated. These frequencies are displayed in the report as the percent responding "yes" or "no" or "excellent," "good," "fair," or "poor" to a question. Upon completion of the first step, each question was then cross - tabulated with the following eight descriptive characteristics: • Length of residence • Owner/renter status • Age • Employment • Education • Income Public Management Associates SD- b Southlake Citizen Survey - 1995 • Families with children • Gender The eight characteristics comprise a set of independent variables that could help to explain variations among the responses of the residents. Several of the characteristics proved useful in selected instances. W PI Public Management Associates SD-7 T Southlake Citizen Survey - 1995 6 III. SAMPLE CHARACTERISTICS Income The largest percentage of respondents (44.2 percent) had incomes over $ 100,000 and a majority (69.7 percent) had incomes of $75,000 or more. Education The overwhelming majority of respondents had some education beyond high school (88.3 percent). Sixty percent had a college degree or post -graduate work. Age The largest percentage of respondents is in the 3645 years of age category. - Seventy-four percent of the respondents are in the 36-60 years of age category. Public Management Associates Sz)-8 I Southlake Citizen Survey - 1995 7 s0% 40% 35.5% 30% % 20.5% 20% 10.1% 10% 5.2% 5.4% 0.7% 0.4% Mai Y A L N p N C CO O = O O c o o A O ro li. O J Public Management Associates Place of Employment Forty-three percent of the respondents work in Southlake (22.2 percent) or Dallas (20.5 percent). Plan to Stay in Southlake-- A majority of respondents plan on staying in Southlake. Length of Residence The largest percentage of respondents (49.2 percent) lived in Southlake for more 1-5 years, with a majority (63.7 percent) reporting length of residence as 5 years or less. It 9 Southlake Citizen Survey - 1995 A y Female '" Male 63.4%rs 36.6% Public Management Associates Gender Sixty-three percent of the respondents were female, and 36.6 percent were male. Children in Household A majority of those surveyed (62.0 percent) have children living at home. Southlake Citizen Survey - 1995 9 0 Between 114 and 1709 41.4% North of 114 27.4% South of 1709 31.3% Public Management Associates Number of People in Household A majority of households (64.2 percent) are made up of three (22.3 percent) or four or five (41.9 percent) people. Location of Residence The largest percentage of respondents live between Highway 114 and Highway 1709. PI PI Southlake Citizen Survey - 1995 10 IV. CITY -SERVICES The majority of survey questions concerned services provided by the City of Southlake. This section of the report presents responses to the service questions. Included are the following services or service concerns: • Streets • Parks and Recreation • Code Enforcement • Garbage Collection and Recycling • Public Safety Following the individual service areas are a set of questions regarding service improvements. Finally, this section concludes with a several questions dealing with joint programs of the city and school district for service delivery and facility usage. (4W Streets Respondents were asked how they would rate the quality of the streets in Southlake as compared to two or three years ago. As may be seen in Figure 1, a majority of respondents (52.7 percent) think the streets have gotten better over the past few years. Smaller percentages of respondents said the condition of streets has remained the same (20.6 percent) or worsened (26.7 percent). Table 1 shows that households with four to six persons (63.4 percent) and children at home (59.1 percent) were more likely than others to think that streets had gotten better. Likewise, respondents located south of 1709 (65.4 percent), in the 25-35 age group (68.6 percent), and 1-5 years of Southlake residence were more likely than others to think that streets had gotten better. Public Management Associates ss' �l p� Southlake Citizen Survey - 1995 Figure 1 Condition of Streets Compared to Two or Three Years Ago? s., same Better 20.6% 52.7% Worse 26.7% Table 1 Condition of Streets, by Selected Socioeconomic Characteristics i of�iouseh'"`lY �:. Response One Two Three Four to Five Six or More Better 23.5 43.2 51.0 63.4 41.2 Qca o Response North of 114 Between 114 South of 1709 Better 38.3 54.5 65.4 age Response 18-25 26-35 36-45 46-60 61 and older Better 55.6 68.6 ;P�, 55.5 44.9 35.9 Response � om Yes No Better 59.1 42.5 Length o£�ResideHE Response Less than 1 year 1-5 years 6-10 years More than 1.0 years Better N/A 58.1 50.0 40.4 Public Management Associates W It Soudslake Citizen Survey - 199S [F The next series of questions focused on park and recreation services. First, respondents were asked if the City of Southlake needs to provide more park and recreation facilities for citizens. Figure 2 shows that the majority of those surveyed (59.0 percent) think more park and recreation facilities are needed. As shown in Table 2, respondents who females (62.1 percent), in the age group 26-35 (67.0 percent), with children at home (67.7 percent), and newer residents (less than one year, 71.3 percent), were more likely than others to favor more park and recreation facilities. Next, respondents were asked to identify those parks and recreation facilities that would be beneficial to the community (Figure 3). At the top of the list, 92.8 percent of the respondents said that walking, jogging, and bicycling trails would be beneficial. Among the next tier, respondents favored more outdoor basketball courts (76.1 percent), a recreation/fitness center (75.4 percent), and a senior center (70.0 percent). Female residents were more likely to favor an indoor pool than male residents, and those residents with incomes less than $30,000 were more likely to favor an indoor pool than those with higher incomes (Table 3). Respondents with children at home and those in the 26-35 age group were more likely than others to favor an equestrian center (Table 4). Females were more likely than males to favor a senior center (Table 5). Respondents who had lived in Southlake for more than 10 years were most likely to favor more outdoor basketball courts (Table 6). Finally, respondents were asked which of the parks and recreation facilities they mentioned was the most important (Table 7). Again, walking, jogging, and bicycling trails were at the top of the list with Public Management'Associates `SD -/41 Soudilake Citizen Survey - 1995 13 over half of the respondents claiming this to be the most important item (56.1 percent). The only other item to reach over ten percent of respondents rating as most important was tennis courts (16.2 percent). It Pullic Yanaggment Associates Southlake Citizen Survey • 1995 14 31 Figure 2 Does the City of Southlake Need to Provide More Park and Recreation Facilities? No 41% Yes 59% Table 2 More Parks and Recreation Facilities, by Selected Socioeconomic Characteristics Public ManagementAssociates �v .44---) 1 , Souffilake Citizen Survey - 1995 15 Figure 3 Percentage of Respondents Indicating the Following Parks and Recreation Facilities To Be Beneficial to the Community? 100% 92.8% 90X 80X 75.4% 76.1 x 68.7% 70.0% 70x 60x 58.0% 55.1 x 50x 45.7% 41.3% 40% -. 30% 20x 10X 0•h of e• 't! • S oo • .. —_ o E I c a. • : v C7 3 c a m o o M < 8 m 3 C a W 0 Public ,Management Associates 50 - 7 It 9 Southlake Citizen Survey - 1995 16 31 Table 3 Indoor Pool Would Benefit Community, by Selected Socioeconomic Characteristics ende Response Female Male Yes 63.8 46.4 n - Response Under $30-50,000 $50-75,000 $75-100,000 $100,000 $30,000 and over Yes 75.0 74.1 62.5 45.9 59.3 Table 4 Equestrian Center Would Benefit Community, by Selected Socioeconomic Characteristics Response 18-25 26-35 36-45 46-60 61 and older Yes 50.0 56.9 39.8 33.8 25.0 Response Yes No Yes 45.0 30.2 Table 5 Senior Center Would Benefit the Community, by Gender W Response Female 7M!a1!e!!! Yes 75.8 9.1 Table 6 More Outdoor Basketball Courts Would Benefit the Community, -by Length of Residence iLengthof Residence Response Less than 1 year 1 1-5 years 6-10 years More than 10 years Yes 68.4 74.7 74.1 93.3 Public Management Associates Southlake Citizen Survey - 1995 17 Table 7 Which of the Parks and Recreation Facilities Mentioned is the Most Important? Facility Percent Walking, Jogging, and Bicycle Trails 56.1 Tennis Courts 16.2 Senior Center 6.7 Recreation/Fitness Center 6.1 Indoor Swimming Pool 4.9 Public Golf Course 3.7 Equestrian Center 3.4 Outdoor Basketball Court 1.8 Amphitheater 1.2 Public Management Associates w Souffilake Citizen Survey - 1995 18 The next series of questions focused on code enforcement programs. Respondents were asked to rate the effectiveness of various code enforcement programs on a four - point scale ranging from very effective to very ineffective. As shown in Figure 4, programs controlling junk vehicles (46.1 percent) and illegal dumping (45.4 percent) received the highest percentages in the "very effective" category, with programs for high grass and weeds receiving the lowest percentage in the "very effective" category (23.2 percent). Not surprisingly, high grass and weeds programs received the highest percentage of responses in the "very ineffective" category (8.4 percent). As Table 8 shows, larger households (four or more persons), households with children at home, and newer residents (less than one year) were more likely than others to view high grass and weed enforcement as very effective. Residents living south of 1709 were most likely to view junk vehicles enforcement as very effective (Table 9). Females were more likely than males to rate litter enforcement as very effective, as were those residents living in Southlake less than one year (Table 10). Respondents living between 114 and 1709 were most likely to rate dumping enforcement as very effective (Table 11). Respondents with children living at home and living south of 1709 were more likely to rate property cleanliness as very effective (Table 12). Finally, residents living in Southlake more than 10 years were more likely than others to rate abandoned buildings enforcement as very effective (Table 13). Public Management Associates 51) -,??, o Southlake Citizen Survey - 1995 Figure 4 Effectiveness of Various Code Enforcement Programs Abandoned Buildings Property cleanliness Illegal Dumping Utter Junk Vehicles High Grass and Weeds 4.2% —, 13.6% 41.2% 41.0% M 46.9% 40.0% Ee ll 45.4'/e _ 45.9%. 37.1 % 37.9%. 46.1 %. - 5d_A% 0% 10% 20% 30%e 40% 50% 60%. 70% Table 8 High Grass and Weeds Rating, by Selected Socioeconomic Characteristics 19 ize r Response One Two Three Four to Five Six or More Very Effective 11.8 20.4 16.5 29.1 31.6 Coil Response Yes No Very Effective 26.2 18.9 ."Legth ofiRessien Response Less than 1 year 1-5 years 6-10 years More than 10 years Very Effective 31.1 24.5 21.3 15.9 9 Public Management Associates 54D Southlake Citizen Survey - 1995 20 Table 9 Junk Vehicles Rating , by Location of Residence Locati6n:o£f6iderice Response North of Between 114 and South of 1709 114 1709 Very Effective 36.3 46.7 52.1 Table 10 Litter Rating , by Selected Socioeconomic Characteristics " Gen" c Response Female Male Very Effective 42.6 27.4 Response Less than 1 year 1-5 years 6-10 years More than 10 years Very Effective 46.3 37.1 42.9 24.8 Table 11 Dumping Rating, by Location of Residence Response North of 114 Between 114 and 1709 South of 1709 Very 33.1 51.4 46.8 Effective Table 12 Property Cleanliness Rating, by Selected Socioeconomic Characteristics ioDin I Response North of 114 Between 114 and 1709 South of 1709 Very Effective 34.9 41.1 43.3 CliildreA atom Response Yes No Very Effective 1 44.9 33.3 Table 13 Abandoned Buildings, by Length of Residence 3�;4rigtY6f-Resid6ifc.6 Public Management Associates Southlake Citizen Survey - 1995 21 Response F Less than 1 year 1-5 years 6-10 years More than 10 yearsery Effective 35.2 36.7 47.3 51.5 Pub ii Manwement Associates sD-,:.;?,3 9 19 Southlake Citizen Survey - 1995 22 Next, respondents were asked a series of questions about garbage collection and recycling programs. First, respondents were asked to report how often their trash was not picked up on scheduled pick-up days in the last twelve months. As may be seen in Figure 5, 70.1 percent of the respondents reported that their home was never missed during the scheduled pick-up days. Just under twenty percent (19.7 percent) claimed to have been missed 1-2 times and another 7.5 percent claimed to have been missed 34 times. Only 2.7 percent reported being missed during trash collection 5 times or more. Next, respondents were asked if their household participates in the curbside recycling program. An overwhelming majority of respondents (92.4 percent) report that their household participates in the curbside recycling program (Figure 6). As shown in Table 14, education seems to be positively correlated with recycling participation. Those respondents p with post -graduate work (95.6 percent) were most likely to participate in recycling programs as compared with 57.1 percent of respondents with less than high school diploma. Finally, respondents were asked if they would be willing to pay an additional $244 per month for brush and tree limb removal services. As Figure 7 indicates, two-thirds of the respondents said they were not willing to pay an extra $2.00 to $4.00 per month for this service. Public Management Associates Southlake Citizen Survey - 1995 23 Figure 5 How Often Have Garbage Collectors Missed Picking Up Your Trash On Scheduled Pick-up Days in the Past Twelve Months? Yes, 3-4 Times Yes, 1-2 Times 7.5% 19.7% Yes, 5 or More Times 2.7•/9 No, Never Missed 70.1 `/e Public Nfanagement Associates 9 PE SouNtlake Citizen Survey - 1995 24 A Figure 6 Does Your Household Participate in the Curbside Recycling Program? No 7.6% Yes (: 92.4% Table 14 Recycling Participation, by Education Response Less than high school graduate High school graduate Some college College graduate Post -graduate work Yes 57.1 86.9 92.8 92.4 95.6 Figure 7 Willingness to Pay an Additional $2-$4 per month for Brush and Tree Limb Removal Service No 66.7Y. Yes 33.3% Public Management Associates Southlake Citizen Survey - 1995 25 The final series of questions that pertained to a specific city service focused on public safety. As may be seen in Figure 8, thirty-eight percent of the respondents said that they had contacted Department of Public Safety for police service in the past year. Those respondents that indicated they had contacted the police were asked a series of follow-up questions rating the service on speed in responding to calls, courtesy, and professionalism. Figure 9 shows that over half of the respondents (55.5 percent) rated response speed as "excellent," with another 33.0 percent rating it as "good." Both on courtesy and professionalism, the police service was rated as "excellent" by over two- thirds of the respondents (70.5 and 67.0 percent, respectively). Similarly, respondents were asked if they had contacted the fire or ambulance services followed by a rating of the service they had contacted. Figure 10 shows that only 4.0 percent of the respondents reported having P p g contacted the fire department in the last year. A slightly lower percentage (3.6 percent) reported they had contacted the ambulance service (Figure 12). When the follow-up rating scale was presented to those respondents who had contacted the services, 83.3 percent rated fire services as "excellent," compared to 90.0 percent as "excellent" for ambulance service (see Figures 11 and 13). Respondents were also queried regarding their use of home smoke and carbon monoxide detectors. Almost all of the respondents (97.7 percent) claimed to have smoke detectors in their home, compared to only 10.1 percent for carbon monoxide detectors. As shown in Table 15, the use of carbon monoxide detectors increased by education Public Management Associates .1 % 5D.-,::;:;7 7 It Soutklake Citizen Survey - 1995 26 level. The greatest percentage of use of carbon monoxide detectors was seen among the (W post -graduate work respondents (16.0 percent). �M Finally, respondents were asked to give an overall rating to the Department of Public Safety. Overall, 39.3 percent rated the Department as "excellent," 51.8 percent rated it "good," and just 8.9 percent rated it as "fair" or "poor". The overall Department of Public Safety rating was significantly related to location of residence and gender. As Table 16 indicates, respondents between 114 and 1709 were most likely to rate the Department as excellent (49.4 percent), and females were more likely than males to offer an excellent rating (41.1 percent to 36.1 percent). Public Management Associates .Suuthlake Citizen Survey - 1995 27 Figure 8 Has Your Household Contacted the Department of Public Safety for Police Service During the Past Year (N=605) No 62.0°/. Yes 38.0% Figure 9 Ratings for Police Service (N=227) 80% 70.5% 6 7o°i. 7.0% 60% 5s.s•�. 50% ■ Excellent 40% ■ Good 33.0°/. O Fair 30% 24.7x 29.1 % ® Poor. 20% 10% 6.4% 5.0% 4.0% 0.9% 3.1% 0.9% 0% Speed in Responding Courtesy Professionalism to Calls Public Management Associates �/D It A Southlake Citizen Survey - 1995 28 Figure 10 Has Your Household Contacted the Department of Public Safety for Fire Service During the Past Year (N=604) Yes 4.0% No 96.0- Figure 11 Rating for Fire Service (N=24) Public iWanagement Associates S,D-30 Southlake Citizen Survey - 1995 29 Figure 12 Has Your Household Contacted the Department of Public Safety for Ambulance Service During the Past Year N=605 Yes 3.6% No 96.4% Figure 13 Rating for Ambulance Service (N=22) 9 It Public Management Associates ;. , Southlake Citizen Survey - 1995 30 Figure 14 Use of Smoke and Carbon Monoxide Detectors in Home 97.7% Smoke Detector 0 2.3% ■ Yes O No 10.1% Carbon Monoxide Detector 89.9% 0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0% 80.0% 90.0% 100.0 (aw Table 15 Use of Carbon Monoxide Detector, by Education N ca5 Response Less than High school Some College Post - high school graduate college graduate graduate graduate work Yes 0.0 —3-4-7 9.2 7.7 1 16.0 Public Management Associates �,5VtA—3 2, Suulhluke Citizen Survey - 1995 31 Figure 15 Overall Rating for Department of Public Safety (N=583) Table 16 Overall Department of Public Safety Rating, by Selected Socioeconomic Characteristics Public Management Associates sn-33 9 9 Southlake Citizen Survey - 1995 32 (*W, Next, respondents were presented with a list of various city services ranging from street maintenance to animal control and asked whether the service needed much, some, or no improvement. As shown in Table 17, street maintenance scored highest on the "much improvement" category (40.2 percent), followed by street lighting (33.2 percent), storm water drainage (24.0 percent), and animal control (19.5 percent). Police and fire service scored highest in the "no improvement" category with 81.6 and 85.9 percent, respectively. As sown in Table 19, many of the service ratings were significantly related to the respondent's length of residence in Southlake. Ratings for street maintenance, street lighting, sewer, storm water drainage, and animal control were all statistically correlated to length of residence. Those respondents who had been in Southlake for more than 10 years were more likely than others to rate these services as needing "much improvement." The onlyservice to show an opposite pp pattern was water service, as residents of the community for more than 10 years were 1= likely than others to report "much improvement." Several of the other service ratings were found to be related to selected socioeconomic characteristics. As seen in Table 20, respondents with children at home were more likely than others to view street maintenance as needing much improvement. Sewer service ratings were found to be related to income category, with the $50,000 to $75,000 category at 33.3 percent, and location of residence, with 28.0 percent of respondents north of 114 reporting much improvement needed (Table 21). Animal control ratings were found to be significantly related to age and gender (Table 22). Older Public Management Associates �,54D_3 V Southlake Citizen Survey - 1995 33 residents and females were more likely than others to report much improvement in animal control was needed. J Respondents that indicated that one or more of the services need much or some improvement were asked a follow-up question to help prioritize the service improvements. Respondents were asked if the service they mentioned should be a high, medium, or low priority for improvement (Table 18). A majority of respondents (59.1 percent) said that street maintenance should be a high priority. Street maintenance was the only service area to receive a high priority ranking by over half of the respondents. Sewer service (47.6 percent), water service (46.2 percent), storm water drainage (45.3 percent) and animal control (40.4 percent) were the service areas that received between forty and fifty percent in the high category. As can be seen in Table 23, females were more likely than males to rate street lighting improvements as a "hi priority 44.1 t � p ty ( 0 30.3 percent). When prioritizing garbage collection improvements, residents in the lower income categories (under $50,000) and those with children at home were more likely to rate garbage collection improvements as a high priority (Table 24). Respondents with children at home were more likely than others to rate water service improvements as a high priority (Table 25). Finally, respondents located north of 114 and male respondents were more likely to rate sewer service improvements as a high priority (Table 26). IF Public Management Associates Southlake Citizen Survey - 1995 34 Table 17 Ratings for Various City Services Service Much Improvement Some Improvement No Improvement Street Maintenance 40.2 % 50.2 % 9.6 % Street Lighting - 33.2 45.0 21.8 Garbage Collection 3.7 18.9 77.4 Water Service _ 12.7 16.3 71.0 Sewer Service - 16.8 11.9 71.3 Storm Water Drainage 24.0 30.9 45.1 Police Service 2.2 16.2 81.6 Fire Service :: 1.5 12.6 85.9 11 Animal Control 19.5 31.2 49.3 Table 18 Among Those Respondents Reporting That Various Services Need Much or Some Improvement, Prioritization of Service Improvements Service High -. Priority .. Medium ::Priority., Low Priority Street Maintenance. 59.1 % 35.9 % -4.8 % Street Lighting 39.4 42.7 17.6 Garbage Collection 18.5 42.7 34.7 Water Service 46.2 36.5 12.8 Sewer Service. 47.6 39.5 12.9 Storm Water Drainage.. 45.3 39.8 14.2 Police Service ' 29.6 52.0 15.3 Fire Service 29.0 49.3 20.3 Animal Control 40.4 34.5 24.3 Public Management Associates SDI -36� Southlake Citizen Survey - 1995 35 Table 19 Various City Service Ratings, by Length of Residence MMAN AWAOM -0j NSIFe7 Maff - .- n_ ce ' Response Less than 1 year 1-5 years 6-10 years More than 10 years Much Improvement 28.7 37.4 39.0 57.5 Response Less than 1 year 1-5 years 6-10 years More than 10 years Much Improvement 25.9 31.7 30.6 45.5 er i Response Less than 1 year 1-5 years~ 6-10 years More than 10 years Much Improvement 14.1 16.5 6.1 7.3 Response Less than 1 year 1-5 years 6-10 years More than 10 years Much Improvement 7.9 10.8 25.4 - - 37,7 r Response Less than 1 year 1-5 years 6-10 years More than 10 years Much Improvement 12.2 21.9 24.2 39.8 V ql Response Less than 1 year 1-5 years years More than 10 years Much Improvement 8.8 18.1 [_�4.2 27,8 Table 20 Street Maintenance Rating, by Children at Home olden ; om Response Yes No Much Improvement ±:: 35.3 48.0 Table 21 Sewer Rating, by Selected Socioeconomic Characteristics Response Under $30-50,000 $50-75,000 $75- Over $30,000 $100,000 $100,000 Much Improvement 8.3 16.7 33.3 21.2 11.1 Response North of 114 Between 114 and 1709 South of 1709 Much Improvement 28.0 16.7 10.6 Public Management Associates '5D=3 9 IM Southlake Citizen Survey - 1995 36 Table 22 Animal Control Rating, by Selected Socioeconomic Characteristics Response 18-25 26-35 36-45 46-60 61 and older Much Improvement 4.8 17.9 18.8 21.6 26.3 e Response Female Male Much Improvement 21.9 15.5 Table 23 Priority of Street Lighting Improvements, by Gender Response Female_d Male High 44.1 30.3 Table 24 Priority of Garbage Collection Improvements, by Selected Socioeconomic Characteristics Response Under $30-50,000 $30,000 $50-75,000 $75- Over $100,000 $100,000 High 33.3 54.5 17.4 4.8 18.0 Response _ om Yes No High 23.0 12.2 Table 25 Priority of Water Service Improvements, by Children at Home AN 0 - 11 . :Children atHom' Response Yes LNo High 51.5 34.0 Public Management/Associates �v �g Soutlilake Citizen Survey - 1995 37 Table 26 Priority of Sewer Improvements, by Selected Socioeconomic Characteristics Response North of 114 -:M:twezen14 and 1709 South of 1709 High 61.1 8.9 45.2 .. M Nimm Response Female Male High 39.5 60.4 P] 9 Public Management Associates Southlake Citizen Survey - 199S • - • • • • 1 • • • • • MI 38 Respondents were given a chance to express their attitudes regarding the sharing of city and school district facilities and programs. When presented with a list of potential joint city/school district projects, respondents were most favorable toward a joint library facility (86.2 percent), followed closely by a joint recreation center (84.6 percent). Slightly behind the top two projects are a combined city and school district administration building (77.1 percent) and additional athletic fields (74.4 percent). In general, the data seem to indicate that joint programs are favored more by those respondents living in Southlake less than five years, with larger households, children living at home, ages 26-45, and higher incomes (not shown). Respondents were also asked how they think about the appropriateness of such joint projects. An overwhelming majority of respondents (88 percent) think that such joint projects are appropriate. As Table 27 shows, females were more likely than males to view joint city/school district projects as appropriate (91.9 to 81.3 percent). Public Management Associates Southlake Citizen Survey - 1995 39 Figure 16 Percentage of Respondents Favoring the Following Joint City and School District Projects 100% sox 64.6% 66.rc 60% 77.1 % . 74.4 /. 70% 59.3% 61.4% 60% 50% 40% 30% - 20% 10% 0% _ 0 V g V c w V yy as ••e 00 c ro a e c E m �L° a° W + � c0i h Public Management Associates W It Soutitlake Citizen Survey - 1995 40 Figure 17 Is it Appropriate or Inappropriate for the City and School District to (iw Participate in Joint Programs, Projects, and Facilities? x Inappropriate Appropriate a8•�G Table 27 Appropriateness of Joint Programs, by Gender Response Female Male Yes 91.9 81.3 Public Management Associates �D `. 4: . Southlake Citizen Survey - 1995 41 V. CITIZEN CONTACT AND INFORMATION',- .X j Citizen Contact with City of Southlake Local governments often pride themselves on being the "government closest to the people" --the government most easily contacted when citizens have problems. Most council members, city managers, and city staff members undoubtedly would agree that citizens do not hesitate to call city hall. To determine the degree of citizen -local government interaction in Southlake, respondents were asked if they had contacted anyone in the City of Southlake government about a problem, a request for service, or for information during the previous year. Over half of the respondents (53.8 percent) reported that they had contacted the city. As can be seen in Table 28, respondents with higher levels of education were more likely to have contacted city hall. Figure 18 shows that the Planning and Zoning Department was contacted most often (15.0 percent), followed by the City Manager's Office (14.3 percent), and the Water Department (14.0 percent). Respondents who had contacted the city were then asked if their problem, request, or question had been resolved and if the people they talked with were courteous. As shown in Figure 19, 64.7 percent of those surveyed reported that problem resolution occurred, and 93.9 percent of the respondents indicated that staff members acted courteously. Newer residents to Southlake were more likely than others to report that their problem or request was resolved (Table 29). Finally, respondents were asked if they had any difficulty reaching the office or person such as being transferred several times or getting disconnected. Overall, 70.4 percent of the respondents said they 9 Public Management Associates Southlake Citizen Survey - 1995 42 0 had no difficulty, 15.3 percent reported having difficulty reaching the office, and 14.3 percent reported using some other means than the telephone (Figure 19). Public Management Associates v D — 41z Southlake Citizen Survey - 1995 43 ' Table 28 Contact with City Hall, by Education uca, Response Less than High school n Some College Post - high school graduate college graduate graduate graduate work Yes 14.3 1 35.6 55.2 52.0 63.2 Figure 18 What Official or Department Did You Contact? City Manager Mayor or Council Water Department Planningizoning Building inspection Code compliance Public Safety Economic Development Parks and Recreation Streets Ubrary Engineering Other 9 0% 5% 10% 151/9 20% 25% I% Public Management Associates sue- ys Southlake Citizen Survey - 1995 44 0 NJ Figure 19 Outcome and Evaluation of City Hall Contact 93.9% People courteous 6.1% 64.7% Problem resolved M Yes 35.3% O No 15.3% Difficulty Making Contact 70.4% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 000% Table 29 Did Call Resolve Problem or Request, by Length of Residence n ide _ Response Less than 1 year, 1-5 years �. 6-10 years More than 10 years Yes 1 81.6 64.4 64.3 51.7 Public Management Associates SD - '-I� Southlake Citizen Survey - 1995 45 Several questions addressed the level and source of citizen information about the community. First, respondents were asked if they think that the city's newsletter is useful in providing information about Southlake. An overwhelming majority of respondents reported that the newsletter is useful (Figure 20). Females and newer residents were more likely to view the city's newsletter as being useful than others (Table 30). The print media is the source of news about the city for most respondents. Respondents were asked if they were a regular reader of various print media including the city newsletter, several local newspapers, and the two regional newspapers (Figure 21). Over eighty percent of the respondents reported being regular readers of the city newsletter (Figure 21). Readership of the city newsletter was found to be statistically related to gender, age, income, and length of residence (Table 31). Amon local newspapers, gthe highest regular readership was recorded for the Grapevine Sun (63.4 percent), followed by the Southlake Journal (43.8 percent) and the Colleyville News and Times (16.3 percent). As can be seen in Table 32, respondents with children at home, higher income levels, and 6 to 10 years of residence were more likely to be readers of the Southlake Journal. Readership of the Grapevine Sun was highest among respondents north of 114 and more than 10 years of Southlake residence (Table 34). Readership of the Colleyville News and Times and Keller Citizen Journal also'varied by location of residence in Southlake (Tables 33 and 35). As for the regional newspapers, 64.6 percent of respondents reported being regular readers of the Fort Worth Star Telegram, as compared to 49.3 percent for the IF Public Mgnnagement Associates �Vl�� Southlake Citizen Survey - 1995 46 Dallas Morning News. As can be seen in Table 36, respondents who were males, with post -graduate work, and higher incomes were more likely than others to be regular readers of the Dallas Morning News. Finally, respondents were asked about their use of cable television. As seen in Figure 22, a majority of Southlake respondents reported having cable service in their home (55.1 percent). Table 37 shows that three to five sized households, with children at home, higher incomes, located between 114 and 1709, and less than five years of residence were more likely than others to have cable television service at home. A follow-up question was asked regarding the likelihood of watching Southlake city council meetings, if they were televised on cable access, just under 20 percent (19.3) said they would watch it regularly, with another 60.8 percent responding that they would watch it occasionally (Figure 23). Those respondents with higher incomes were more likely to anticipate watching council . meetingsTable 38 ( ) Public Management Associates s1D- �/Y Southlake Citizen Survey - 1995 47 1' Figure 20 Is the City's Newsletter Useful to You in Providing Information About Southlake? No 12.0% Yes 88.0% Table 30 City's Newsletter is Useful, by Gender Response Female Male Yes 91.4 82.1 Response Less than 1 year 1-5 yearsT6-10ars More than 10 years Yes 91.6 90.2 78.2 9 Public Management Associates �5/ag1 1/ �� OR Southlake Citizen Survey - 199s Figure 21 Are You a Regular Reader of the Following News Sources? City Newsletter Southlake Journal Colleyville News and Tlmes Grapevine Sun Keller Citizen Journal Dallas Morning News Fort Worth Star Telegram 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 48 O Regular Reader Table 31 Regular Reader of City Newsletter, by Selected Socioeconomic Characteristics Response Female Male Yes 83.8 74.4 Response 18-25 26-35 36-45 46-60 61 and older Yes 52.4 80.4 83.3 79.7 78.0 Response Under $30,000 $300-50,000 $50-75,000 $75- $100,000 Over $100,000 Yes 35.3 76.6 74.7 92.2 80.2 Response ngfh'o#Ze 1 e Less than 1 year 1-5 years 6-10 years More than 10 years Yes 84.9 83.3 79.0 70.0 Public Management Associates �D-,5-D Southlake Citi.-en Survey - 1995 49 Table 32 Regular Reader of Southlake Journal, by Selected Socioeconomic Characteristics }iilc3ren atiom Response Yes No Yes 49.0 35.3 co _ Response Under $300-50,000��$50-75,000 $75- Over $100,000 $30,000 $100,000 Yes 6.3 39.6 41.1 41.5 50.4 QI yen—g h"oReside_nce Response Less than 1 year 1-5 years 6-10 years More than 10 years Yes 44.8 41.1 58.0 37.8 Table 33 Regular Reader of Colleyville News and Times, by Location of Residence �"o tM q�iesi at - Response North of 114 Between 114 South of 1709 and 1709 Yes 11.9 41.2 21.0 Table 34 Regular Reader of Grapevine Sun, by Location of Residence Response North of 114 Between 114 and 7709 South of 1709 Yes 78.6 66.0 . 47.8 e Response ILess than 1 year 1-5 years 6-10 years More than 10 years Yes 44.3 57.1 79.0 81.4 Table 35 Regular Reader of Keller Citizen Journal, by Location of Residence �ocation.'ofresideiic "2.2 Response North of 114 Between 114 and 1709 SouYes 9.4 7.9 Public Maan�agement Associates W PC Southlake Citizen Survey - 1995 50 A Table 36 Regular Reader of Dallas Morning News, by Selected Socioeconomic Characteristics Response Female Male Yes 45.7 55.4 Response Less than high school graduate High school graduate Some college College graduate Post - graduate work Yes 1 50.0 20.0 45.8 55.1 58.2 Response Under $30,000 $300-50,000 $50-75,000 $75- $100,000 Over $100,000 Yes 35.3 35.4 34.8 49.6 56.4 Public Management Associates 5b-sZ' Southlake Citizen Survey - 1995 Figure 22 Do You Have Cable Television Service in Your Home? (N=603) No 44.9% Yes 55.1 % Table 37 Cable Television Service in Home, by Selected Socioeconomic Characteristics 51 _ i o Response One Two Three Four to Five Six or More Yes 26.3 51.5 60.0 59.8 35.0 _ o Response North of 114 Between 114 South of 1709 Yes 44.9 58.5 57.7 ...a �� Response Under $30,000 $300-50,000 $50-75,000 $75- Over $100,000 $100,000 Yes 17.6 35.4 45.6 56.9 67.8 Iul�re� Response Yes No Yes 58.6 49.6 .: :Length of�esiden Response Less than 1 year 1-5 years 6-10 years More than 10 years Yes 64.8 67.3 39.4 28.3 Public Management Associates c5b'^� 9 9 Southlake Citizen Survey - 1995 52 31 Figure 23 Among Cable Television Subscribers, Likelihood of Watching Southlake City Council Meetings If They Were Televised (N=332) Table 38 Likelihood of Watching Council Meetings, by Income co - Response Under $30-50,000 $50-75,000 $75- Over $30,000 $100,000 $100,000 Yes 0.0 17.6 14.6 20.3 22.1 Public Management Associates SD Z Southlake Citizen Survey - 1995 53 VI. QUALITY -OF LIFE AND DEVELOPMENTL js Increasingly, citizens are becoming more aware and vocal about the quality of life in the city in which they live. A number of questions in the 1995 Southlake citizen survey addressed quality of life concerns. Residents of Southlake seem very satisfied with their choice of a place to live. Sixty-seven percent of the respondents rate Southlake as an excellent place to live and 28.6 percent rate the city as a good place to live, for a strong combined excellent/good rating of 95.2 percent (Figure 24). Ratings of excellent for the city as a place to live were highest among respondents who lived between highways 114 and 1709 and those with shorter length of residence (Table 39). Short-term residents were asked why they moved to Southlake. As Figure 25 shows, the largest percentages of those surveyed said they moved to the city because of the rural atmosphere (29.0 percent) or the quality of schools (23.9 percent). A larger percentage of short-term residents (5 years or less) than longer -term residents (more than 5 years) cited quality of schools as the reason they moved to Southlake, while a larger percentage of longer -term residents, especially those in the 10 years or more category (53.0 percent), than short- term residents, especially those in the less than 1 year category (9.3 percent), indicated that the rural atmosphere was the reason they moved to Southlake (see Table 40). Respondents were also asked to rate the quality of their neighborhood in terms of condition of houses, streets, and landscaping. As was the case for living in the city, a majority of respondents (86.8 percent) rated their neighborhoods as excellent (59.9 percent) or good (29.9 percent), as displayed in Figure 26. The percentages of It Publics Management Associates 5 Soudhlake Citizen Survey - 1995 54 respondents who rated their neighborhood as excellent increased with income, decreased with length of residence and were larger among respondents who lived between highways 114 and 1709 and south of highway 1709 (Table 41). Respondents were somewhat divided with respect to the impact continued growth would have on Southlake's quality of life. A majority of respondents (52.1 percent) thought continued growth would detract from the city's quality of life; however, a sizable minority (41.2 percent) thought that growth would improve the city's quality of life (Figure 27). The percentages of respondents who thought that continued growth would improve quality of life declined with education, income and length of residence (Table 42). The next question asked respondents to consider a tax increase, increased development to expand the tax base, or a combination of the two as a means to maintain the current level of services in the city. As Figure 28 shows, a majority of those surveyed (66.7 percent) favored more development. Those respondents with longer length of residence in Southlake were more likely to favor development (Table 43). Respondents were then read a list of types of development and they were asked if they supported more of each development type in the future. Although, with the exception of fast food restaurants, a majority of respondents supported all types of development, the heaviest support was found for retail stores (80.8 percent), full -menu restaurants (75.4 percent), and professional services (73.9 percent), as shown in Figure 29. Public Management Associates SoulGlake Citizen Survey - 1995 55 Respondents with children (42.1 percent) were more likely to support fast food restaurants than were respondents without children (31.1 percent). Support for single- family housing was higher among males (71.6 percent) than among females (57.8 percent). Support for professional services was lowest in the 61 and older age group (Table 44). The percentage of respondents who favored more single-family housing was smallest among respondents living between highways 114 and 1709 (Table 45). According to respondents, low density and design and appearance regulations are the two factors that most distinguish Southlake as a place to live (Figure 30). Respondents who live between highways 114 and 1709 were more likely to say that superior public services distinguished the city than were their counterparts (Table 46). The percentages of respondents who said low density housing was an important distinguishing factor increased with education and income, and was higher in the 26-60 age group p than in the 18-25 or 61 and older age groups (Table 47). - When asked to indicate if low residential density, a low level of congestion, low - to -moderate taxes, or a high level of businesses and services was the most important feature for the future of the community, majority support was not recorded for any of the features (Figure 31). The largest percentage of those surveyed (34.5 percent) favored low residential density followed by a low level of congestion (29.1 percent). Support for low residential density increased with income, while support for low -to moderate taxes declined with income (Table 48). Almost 90 percent of the respondents reported that they had deed restrictions on their homes (Figure 32). As shown in Table 49, the presence of deed restrictions was It Public Management Asspciates Southlake Citizen Survey - 199S 56 N highest among those respondents living in Southlake five years and under and lowest among those in Southlake more than ten years. The next series of questions focused on neighborhood associations and the city's SPIN program. Equal percentages of respondents have access to a neighborhood associations (66.7 percent) and attend association meetings (65.2 percent). Although 71 percent of the respondents were aware of the SPIN program, only 31.6 percent indicated that they had attended a SPIN meeting. However, 73.7 percent of those surveyed said that the SPIN program was of value (Figure 33). The percentage of respondents who reported access to an active neighborhood association increased with income, decreased with length of residence, and was smallest among respondents living north of Highway 114 (Table 50). Attendance at neighborhood association meetings increased with income (Table 51). Familiarity with SPIN increased with income and was highest i g n the 36-45 age group (Table 52), and was higher among respondents living between highways 114 and 1709 and south of 1709 than among respondents living north of Highway 114 (Table 53). Finally, participation in the SPIN program was more likely among respondents living between highways 114 and 1709 and south of 1709 than among respondents living north of Highway 114 (Table 54). A larger percentage of respondents with children (79.5 percent) than those without children (61.9 percent) thought SPIN was a benefit to them and their neighborhood. Likewise, respondents with shorter residence in Southlake were more likely to view SPIN as a benefit (Table 55). Public Management Associates s�-sg Soulklake Citizen Survey - 1995 57 Respondents were also asked if they ever had attended a city council, planning and zoning, zoning board of adjustment, or park board meeting. As Figure 33 shows, the largest percentage of respondents reported attending a city council meeting (46.6 percent), followed by a planning and zoning meeting (35.9 percent). The percentage of respondents attending a city council meeting increased with age and income (Table 56). Finally, respondents were asked if they were aware of the peer mediation program that is jointly sponsored by the city and the school district, and a majority (53.9 percent) were aware (Figure 34). Awareness was higher among families with children (60.9 percent) and females (54.3 percent) than among families without children (21.6 percent) and males (31.8 percent). Peer mediation awareness also increased with income (Table 57). Of those respondents who were aware of peer mediation, 92.5 percent supported the program (Figure 35). It Public Management Associates -�Z)-s9 Southlake Citizen Survey - 1995 58 Figure 24 Ratings for Southlake as a Place to Live �W Table 39 Rating of Quality of Life as Excellent, by Selected Socioeconomic Characteristics X Less than 1 year 1-5 years 6-10 years More than 10 years 72.7 71.2 61.6 54.0 tto _ North of 114 Between 114 and 1709 South of 1709 60.4 71.1 1 64.3 Public Management Associates e .- /0 0 Southlake Citizen Survey - 1995 59 Figure 25 Why Respondents Moved to Southlake 50°i. 40% 30% 29.0% 23.9% 20% 16.9% 14.7% 10% 5.6% 4.2 k 3.3% 2.4% irr0t �O E A �O « o u� p � = CrQ aO ECF E c aE a' m - a a o Table 40 Reson for Moving to Southlake, by Length of Residence Response Less than 1 year 1-5 years 6-10 years More than 10 years Rural atmosphere 9.3 23.8 37.2 53.0 Quality of schools 29.1 32.5 16.3 2.0 Access employmet 22.1 15.5 10.5 10.0 Housing quality 9.3 4.7 5.8 5.0 Low density 1.2 2.9 8.1 7.0 General Appearance 2.3 4.3 3.5 1.0 Proximity DFW 3.5 2.5 2.3 1.0 Other 71.6 63.9 49.5 32.4- I K Public Management Associates Southlake Citizen Survey - 1995 60 �X Figure 26 Ratings for Neighborhood Quality Table 41 Percent Rating Neighborhood as Excellent, by Selected Socioeconomic Characteristics caFm Response Under $30,000 $30-50,000 $50-75,000 $75-100,000 Over $100,000 Excellent 11.8 28.3 39.3 59.5 72.1 INIIIIIIII-11111 -NOR Response North of 114 Between 114 and 1709 South of 1709 Excellent 36.7 64.2 64.4 n side r� Response Less than 1 year 1-5 years 6-10 years More than 10 years Excellent 71.6 63.9 49.5 32.4 Public Management Associates Soutblake Citizen Survey - 1995 61 Figure 27 Impact of Continued Growth on City Quality Detract 52.1 % Improve 41.r/. No effect 6.77. Table 42 Impact of Continued Growth on Quality of City u �o Response Less than High school Some College Post - high school graduate college graduate graduate graduate work Improve 66.7 52.5 44.2 37.6 35.8 _ COII1 Response Under $300-50,000 $50-75,000 $75- Over $30,000 $100,000 $100,000 Improve 62.5 56.5 37.2 39.2 38.4 4 i$e Response .-M.M. Less than 1 year 1-5 years v 6-10 years More than 10 years Improve 60.2 42.9 27.4 34.0 Public Management Associates r It Southlake Citizen Survey - 1995 62 Figure 28 Preference for Higher Taxes, More Development, or Combination Combination Higher taxes 30.2% 3.1 % More development 66.7% Table 43 Preference for Higher Taxes or More Development, by Length of Residence Wrnpq Response Less than 1 year 1-5 years 6-10 years More than 10 years Taxes 7.1 2.7 2.1 1.9 Development 52.9 64.7 71.1 79.6 Combination 40.0 32.5 26.8 18.4 Public Management Associates ,L \0 V C Southlake Citizen Survey - 1995 63 Figure 29 Preference for Future Development in Southlake General services 57.0% Single-family housing 62.9% Professional services 73 9% Fast food restaurants 37 9% 10 Percent yes Full -menu restaurants 75.4% Supermarkets 59.9% Retail stores 80.8% 0% 10% 20% 30'% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Table 44 Favor Professional Services, by Age g Response 18-25 26-35 36-45 46-60 61 and older Yes 80.0 78.9 75.1 71.8 55.0 Table 45 Favor Single -Family Housing, by Location of Residence sponse North 114 Between 114 and 1709 South of 1 Yes 65.1 56.5 1 68.2 Public Management Associates PI PI Southlake Citizen Survey - 1995 64 Figure 30 Factors that Distinguish Southlake as a Place to Live 12.2% Arts programs 28.10%, 59.7% 72.1 % Low density 11.5% Design and appearance 57•r/• CA lot regulations 27.5Y° ■A little !rI5.4% O Not at all 31.0% Superior public services 38.1% 30.8% 21.5% Superior park system 32.8% 45.7% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 7k 80% 90% 100% (44W Table 46 Superior Public Services, by Location of Residence Response North 114 Between 114 and 1709 South of 1709 1 A lot 21.6 39.7 25.4 Public Managgeemment Asssociaattes 5v `+ Soutltlake Citizen Survey - 1995 65 Table 47 Low Density Housing, by Selected Socioeconomic Characteristics - I Response Less than high school High school graduate Some college College graduate Post -graduate work A lot 62.5 59.6 62.7 77.9 79.9 Response Under $30,000 $30-50,000 M50-75,000 $75-100,000 Over $100,000 A lot 31.3 44.4 78.7 75.2 76.3 !Response 18-25 26-35 3645 46-60 61 and older A lot 35.5 71.1 74.7 74.9 63.2 Public Management Associates %D-�o7 It PI It Southlake Citizen Survey - 1995 66 Figure 31 (*owl Most Important Feature for the Future of the Community L A Table 48 Importance of Factors, by Income Response Under $300-50,000 $50-75,000 $75-$100,000 Over $30,000 $100,000 Low density 6.3 22.9 31.1 33.6 40.1 High level of 6.3 16.7 18.9 18.8 10.8 services Low/moderate 43.8 35.4 22.2 21.9 16.2 taxes Low level 43.8 25.0 27.8 25.8 32.9 congestion Public Managejme/nt Associates geV �l-108 Southlake Cilizen Survey - 1995 67 Figure 32 Presence of Deed Restrictions Yes 88.4% No 11.6% Table 49 Presence of Deed Restrictions, by Length of Residence �'e g Response Less than 1 year 1-5 years 6-10 years More than 10 years Yes 91.8 92.4 86.3 76.5 Publie'rNanagementAss dates 9 PE Southlake Citizen Survey - 1995 68 NJ Figure 33 Neighborhood and SPIN Associations soi. 71.0% 73.7% 70% 66.7% 65.2% 601/6. 50%. 40% 31.6% 300/ ■ Percent yes 20•i 10• -- 0Y o cV a Z Z o =° re L p Q A C O IL Public Management Associates Q5"0 - 7D Southlake Citizen Survey - 1995 69 Table 50 Does Neighborhood Have Active Association, by Selected Socioeconomic Characteristics com. Response Under $300-50,000 $50-75,000 $75- Over $30,000 $100,000 $100,000 Yes 31.3 42.9 48.9 65.1 82.0 _ n �ftg,,esi ence �. Response Less than 1 year 1-5 years 6-10 years More than 10 years Yes 81.4 75.0 56.6 41.5 Response North of 114 Between 114 and 1709 South of 1709 Yes 39.4 74.7 79.2 Table 51 Attend Neighborhood Association Meetings, by Income Under $30,000 40.0 $30-50,000 -� $50-75,000 $75- $100,000 50.0 47.7 64.3 Over $100,000 73.1 Response Yes Table 52 Familiar with SPIN, by Age Response Yes Under $30,000 29.4 $30-50,000 43.8 m $50-75,000 67.8 $75-100,00 74.6 Over $100,00 77.3 Response Yes 18-25 42.9 26-35 69.2 S� m 36-45 78.6 46-60 66.9 61 and older 61:0 Public Management Associates 56-!tA1 It 19, ' SouNilake Citizen Survey - 1995 70 Table 53 Familiar With SPIN, by Location of Residence Response North of 114 Between 114 South of and 1709 1709 Yes 59.1 77.5 74.4 Table 54 Participate in SPIN, by Location of Residence Response North of 114 Between 114 South of 1709 and 1709 Yes 20.2 31.4 38.6 Table 55 Is SPIN a Benefit to You and Your Neighborhood, by Length of Residence Response Less than 1 year 1-5 years 6-10 years More than 10 years Yes 88.4 78.9 +--64.4 54.2 Public Management Associates .�"� - 74 Southlake Citizen Survey - 1995 71 Figure 33 Meeting Attendance 60% 50% 46.6% 40% 35.9% 30% 20% ■ Percent yes 12.5% 10.5% 10%. 0%. c v A o 0 U 0 c A 0 m o m C 0 C! 7 ` U a c `o a r0 Table 56 Attend City Council Meeting, by Income and Age Response Under $30-50,000 $50-75,000 $75-100,00 Over $30,000 $100,00 Yes 17.6 33.3 44.4 46.6 50.2 Response 18-25 26-35 LE 36-45 46-60 61 and older Yes 38.1 21.7 1 46.5 58.7 53.7 Public Management Associates v ^ 73 9 It Southlake Citizen Survey - 1995 72 Figure 34 Aware of Peer Mediation Yes 53.9% No 7S7 } �i � ' J "i F• l 46.1 % Table 57 Aware of Peer Mediation, by Income Response Under $30-50,000 $50-75,000 $75-100,00 Over $30,000 $100,00 Yes 5.9 25.5 43.3 50.0 53.3 Public Management Associates �5D - 7-V Southlake Citizen Survey - 1995 73 Figure 35 Support Peer Mediation Yes 92.5% No 7.5% 1 a Public Management Associates �� — 7,5— PE Southlake Citizen Survey - 1995 74 L41 VII. CONCLUSIONS The results of the 1995 Southlake citizen survey indicate a high overall level of general citizen satisfaction with municipal services. The respondents seemed to be very satisfied with the public safety services, having given the police, fire, and ambulance services high grades for performance. Among those service areas identified by respondents where service improvements could be implemented include street maintenance, street lighting, storm water drainage, and animal control. Additionally, street maintenance was also rated as the highest priority for improvement. A majority of those surveyed think more park and recreation facilities are needed in Southlake. Among those facilities most desired, respondents identified walking, jogging, and bicycling trails, more outdoor basketball courts, a recreation/fitness center and a senior center. Residents also seemed pleased with the responsiveness of the local government. Many residents had contacted city hall and found the staff to be helpful in resolving issues and courteous in treating the public. The city's newsletter was also rated very high by residents as a source of quality information about the city. Residents seem to genuinely like Southlake' quality of life as evidenced by the 95.2 percent of the respondents who rate the community as an excellent or good place to live. Neighborhood quality received a similar excellent/good rating from respondents (86.8 percent). Southlake residents are active as evidenced by the presence of neighborhood association and the level of attendance at association meetings. Although Public Management Associates ,5ZD- 76 Soulhlake Citizen Survey - 1995 75 participation is not as high in the SPIN program, a majority of respondents (73.7 percent) think that SPIN is of value. Overall, residents appear to be quite satisfied with their community and the direction being taken by the city. 9 9 Public Management Associates D-77 CITY OF SOUTHLAKE 1996 CITIZEN SURVEY PROPOSAL Submitted by Public Management Associates 624 West University Drive, Suite 181 Univeresuty Denton, Texas 76201 September 23, 1996 sty-78 PROPOSAL CITY OF SOUTHLAKE 1996 CITIZEN SURVEY SECTION I LNURODUCTION A. SUMMARY OF THE PROPOSED APPROACH Public Management Associates proposes the design, administration, execution, and analysis of a random sample survey of Southlake citizen attitudes and opinions. The research team will assist city staff in the design of a survey instrument, based on input from the staff and council. The sample, which will be generated by the use of Random Digit Dialing (RDD) methodology or by accessing telephone mire supplied by the telephone company, is designed to be generalizable to the residents of the City of Southlake. The survey will be administered by trained interviewers using a state-of-the-art telephone interviewing facility in Denton to the random sample of Southlake citizens. A final report will be prepared and presented to the staff and council. F*,3Wlft:XXT%*Jal The purpose of this research is to obtain information, opinions, ideas, and concerns from a broad spectrum of Southlake citizens concerning city policies, programs, and services. Additionally, citizens will be asked about issues relevant to the future of the community. This information can be used by city policy makers to assess the degree of satisfaction among citizens with specific city services and facilities, opinions about major problems facing;the community, and priorities for the future of Southlake. To satisfy the purposes of this project, the following major objectives will be accomplished. I. Design a survey instrument based on input and guidance from city staff and council. 2. Administer the telephone survey to a random sample of Southlake citizens. 3. Analyze the data acquired from the citizen survey. 4. Submit a final report. 1 SD 79 SECTION 11 TELEPHONE SURVEY OF CITIZENS A. SANWLING PROCEDURES A random sample will be drawn using RDD methodology. The random digit method is being used because it offers three advantages over the use of existing telephone lists that might come from telephone or cross-reference directories. First, RDD comes closest to ensuring that the conceptual and sampling frame match, that is, all residents age 18 years or older who have telephones will be comprise the sampling frame. Second, unlisted telephone numbers cyill be included in the sample. And third, the sampling frame will be as current as possible, thus, maximiring the probability that residents who have lived in Southiake three months or more, but who are not yet listed in a directory, will be included. The sample will be screened for non-wor"— and non-residential numbers. A second sampling option will be the use of telephone numbers supplied by the major telephone provider in the city. Standard statistical methodology requires a total of 600 responses for a +1- 4 percent margin of sampling error at the 95 percent confidence level. B. SURVEY INSTRLIIENT: DESIGN AND CONTENT The development of the survey questionnaire will be the responsibility of the research team, based on input from the Southlake city manager, staff, and council. The research team will use this input to develop a quality survey instrument, adhering to the standard techz iques of instrument design and question construction. The questionnaire used in the 1994 citizen survey will be used as the basis for the 1996 instrument. The following subtasks have been identified for the construction of the survey questionnaire: a. City and research team will meet to discuss the general elements of the Southlake survey instrument and review the 1994 instrument. i b. Based on the ideas presented at the initial meeting, the research team will develop a draft survey instrtir ent for review. c. The research team will corder a second time with city staff to review to discuss changes in the survey questionnaire. d. Based on the second meeting, the research team will refine the questionnaire and present the final draft to city staff for review. The city will have final approval authority over the questionnaire. The final questionnaire will be limited to an approximate interview time of 10 minutes . PI e. The research team will prc-test the final survey questionnaire, City staff will be consulted if any significant alterations in the questionnaire are required as a result of pre- testing. f. Results will be provided to the city six weeks after approval of the questionnaire. C. AANM'ISTERLNG THE SURVEY ESSTRUMENT 1. Interviewer selection, training, and monitoring A critical aspect of a successful telephone survey is the quality of the interviewers. Selecting, training, and monitoring interviewers is of paramount concern. The goal is mot to allow interviewers to bias the response of an individual. In telephone surveying, it is Possible that the respondent might receive verbal clues regarding the interviewer's opinion, and might hear the interviewer's reaction to particular responses. Several important steps will be taken to minimize potential interviewer -induced bias. The research team will use a facility that maintains a pool of approximately 30 interviewers who have been trained in telephone interviewing techniques and who have had previous experience in telephone surveys. Each interviewer hired completes an intensive general training session. The purposes of general training are to ensure that iMmiewers have understood and practiced all of the basic skills needed to conduct interviews, and that they are knowledgeable about standard interviewing conventions. In addition, all interviewers will attend a specific training session for the Southlake project. The project training session, provides information on the background and goals of the study. Interviewers will go through the questionnaire noting the written question -by -question instructions and skip patterns. Interviewers will administer the questionnaire in order to familiarize themselves with the question -by -question instructions, and to practice correctly pacing the interview. 2. Assurance of respondent confidentiality The introductory phase of each telephone contact will include a reference to complete confidentiality of the information collected. Further, interviewers will be instxucMd. to fully comply with this principle and disregard any possible references that respondents may ,make that would jeopardize such confidewiality. 3. Administration of survey questionnaire All interviewing is conducted from a centralized telephone bank in Denton, Teias. An experienced telephone supervisor is on duty at all tithes to supervise the administration of the 3 sample, monitor for quality control, and handle any other problems. Shifts of interviewers are used throughout the day and evening. All telephone numbers in a sample are tried at least five times, using a rotating schedule of call-backs to ensure that a number has been tried at various times during the day and evening. Households with answering machines are given spcLal effort during off hours to increase the chances of contact. The research Learn uses the Computer Assisted Survey Execution System (CASP-S) version 3.6 on IBM personal computers and operates 20 interviewing stations and one monitoring station from its interviewing facility in Denton, Texas. CASES is an interactive computing system that allows on-line interviewing and continual data entry for each respondent. The survey questionnaire is programmed into the system; interviewers then read each question as it appears on a computer monitor and directly enter the respondent's a,wwer into the computerized data base. The software automatically takes the interviewer through any skip or branching patterns in the instrument, eliminates incorrect response codes, eliminates the need for separate data entry, and allows for frequent tabulation of data as the survey proceeds. 4. Construction and protection of survey data base Using the latest state-of-the-art statistical software (SPSS-PC 6.0 for windows) the raw data file will be analyzed. Basic frequency distributions will be prepared to detect the presence of any data errors that could have occurred. A sample of cases will be checked for accuracy and any discrepancies will be corrected. Complete protection and confidentiality of the survey data base will be assured during all phases of data analysis. 5. Data Analysis and Report The same statistical software used in data analysis will be used to generate cables for inclusion in the final report to the city. Frequency distributions for each survey questic� and demographic characteristics will be developed. Cross -tabulations of each question by selected demographic characteristics (age, length of residence, owner/renter status, etc.) will be included in the analysis. SECTION III ADMLNISTRATIVE WORK PLAN i TASK 1: DESIGN OF THE SLTRVEY LNSTRL7NIENT. This task will invo e meetings with city staff to discuss the preliminary draft survey, drafting the preliminary survey instrument, revising the draft, and producing the final survey instrument. 64—) — Fc�� TASK 2: DEVELOP THE SAILING FRAME. This task will involve selec'zion of an appropriate sampling frame and drawing of a random sample of Southlake residents concurrent with the design of the survey instrument. TASK 3: SELECTION AND N TRUN-Li 1G OF LNTERViEWERS. This task will involve the selection and hiring of an adequate number of interviewers and training each of the urtervuewers. TASK 4: CONDUCT THE TELEPHONE SURVEY. This task will involve a pre- testing procedure, resolution of any changes in the instrument, and actual administration of the survey instrument to the selected sampling frame_ i TASK 5: ANALYSIS OF SLRVEY DATA. This task will involve designing the basic data base that ultimately will be provided to the city, the initial tabulation of raw survey data, cleaning cite data, basic cross -tabulations, additional analysis, and drafting a preliminary report. TASK 6: COMPILE FINAL REPORT. This task will involve drafting a find report. The draft report will be revised based on input from city staff. Ten reproducible copies of the final report will be provided to the city staff. SECTION IV. CREDENTIALS Dr. Victor S. DeSantis will serve as project director for the 1996 Southlake Citizen Survey. He directed both the 1994 Southlake citizen and business survey. In addition, the has designed and implemented a variety of research projects for government agencies an noh profit agencies including 10 citizen surveys, feasibility studies, needs assessments, and progra� evaluations. i Dr. James J. Glass will serve as project adviser for the 1995 Southlake CitizewSurvey project. He will be responsible for providing advice on all aspects of the survey. Dr. Glass has served as the director of numerous applied survey research projects where he has ben responsible for all aspects of the project, but of particular relevance is his experience in administering general population citizen surveys. Dr. Glass has conducted over 30 general population surveys for Texas local governments. Cities he has worked for, with the number of projects in parenthesis, include: Addison (3). Bellaire (6), Belton (1), Collin County (i), rr Caollton (3), Denton (12), Flower: Mound (2). Fort Worth (3), Grand Prairie and Gr Prairie ISD (3), Keller (1), McKinney (1), and Mont Belvieu (1). He has also conducted several local needs assessment surveys, as well as numerous state and national surveys.; S D- S13 The firm -faced price for the project is $10,500. An initial payment shall be made upon execution of this agreement, and periodic payments shall be made as specified below: 1/3 total project cost upon execution of agreement. 113 total project cost upon completion of telephone survey. 1/3 total project cost upon submission of final report. 6 5 -ID- 81-F 6wn City of Southlake, Texas October 10, 1996 TO: Curtis Hawk, City Manager FROM: Kate Barlow, Economic Development Coordinator SUBJECT: Agreement with Public Management Associates for Business Survey Two years ago, Fall 1994-Winter 1995, the City conducted a business needs survey of existing Southlake businesses in conjunction with Public Management Associates (PMA). The purpose of the research was to obtain information, opinions, and concerns from existing Southlake businesses. The information was used to assess the degree of satisfaction among the business community in regards to Southlake's business and development climate and city development programs and services. A copy of the 1995 final report is attached. Similar to the citizen survey, it was decided to update this data every two years. Due to their familiarity with the City and this project, PMA has provided the attached proposed to conduct the 1996/1997 business survey. A mail survey of the city's approximately 600 plus businesses will be conducted in a three -step process. First, all businesses will be sent a survey questionnaire and cover letter. Second, a reminder postcard will be sent one week after the questionnaire is first mailed. Third, those organizations not responding to the initial request, will be sent a second questionnaire approximately three weeks later. The cost of professional services for this project is $3,200. The Southlake Chamber of Commerce will assume all responsibility for the three mailings including postage and stationery; this project is one of five included in the city's contract for services with the Chamber. Staff requests authorization to enter into an agreement with Public Management Associates to design, oversee survey administration, analyze and prepare a report of Southlake business attitudes and opinions. KGB Attachments: 1995 Business Needs Survey Proposal, City of Southlake 1996 Business Needs Assessment d: \wp-files\citycncl\memos. wpd sD- �-8� Soulhlake Business Needs Survey - 1995 The purpose of this business needs survey was to obtain information, opinions, and concerns from a broad spectrum of businesses in the City of Southlake. This information can be used by city staff to assess the degree of satisfaction among business owners with specific components of the business and development climate in Southlake and city development programs and services. A mail survey of the city's approximately 394 businesses was conducted between December 1994 and February 1995 to obtain information on areas to help city staff increase their understanding of the business owners. The survey was administered using a questionnaire developed by the consultants and city economic development staff. The primary objectives of this were to: • Assess business owners' opinions, ideas, and concerns about city policies, P � tY programs, and services that affect businesses and the business climate in the community; • Obtain reasons why new businesses located in and existing businesses remained in Southlake; • Ask questions pertaining to future location and expansion plans of area businesses; • Develop a classification of business types located in Southlake. This report is an analysis of the data collected from the 1995 Business Needs Survey. A total of 186 usable survey instruments were returned from the 394 businesses on the initial mailing list for a total response rate of 47.2 percent. The report that follows is divided into seven sections (including this introduction). Section II explains the survey methodology. Section III details the characteristics of those businesses that responded to Public Management Associates ,- C.J C� / Southlake Business Needs Survey - 1995 2 the survey. Section IV looks at Southlake as a business location. Section V shows how businesses rated various city services. Section VI is doing business in Southlake. The last section, Section VII, explores city and business community relations. It Public Management Associates Southlake Business Needs Survey - 1995 3 2N IN • ya' R i ` � F� 4 jt'i#4� ���ad� � t Tit � `>� X.1 t,:.� 5. £ x 1. �. • 3 a rr<x.,,iy` _ �r_ g _ 3,'_ t` 1 t .•ffiS The development of the business needs survey questionnaire was the responsibility of the consultant with significant input from Southlake city staff. The survey instrument adhered to standard techniques of instrument design and question construction. A final, camera-ready copy of the survey was produced by the consultant and delivered to city staff. As well, the consultant designed and delivered to city staff a postcard reminder for the purpose of increasing the survey response rate. City staff were responsible for copying and mailing all surveys and reminder cards. All surveys were sent to respondents with a stamped return envelope to be forwarded directly to the consultant. This process helps to assure respondents of confidentiality and increase response rate. The consultant provided assistance to city staff during the survey administration phase. The data was collected by means of a three -step mail survey to local businesses. First, all businesses were sent a survey questionnaire and cover letter. Second, all businesses were sent a postcard reminding them of the survey and asking for their cooperation one week after the initial questionnaire was mailed. Third, those agencies not responding to the initial request for information and postcard follow-up were sent a second questionnaire approximately six weeks later. The three-phase approach to the business needs survey is standard for mail surveys and should produce an acceptable response rate. Public Manageem%enntt Associ s 8Y Soulhlake Business Needs Survey - 1995 4 Upon receiving the completed survey questionnaires in the mail, the consultant all coded and edited all survey instruments. Extraneous or invalid responses were manually y p corrected and any necessary coding was performed. Survey questionnaires were then entered directly into a computer database and transferred to floppy disks. Using the latest state-of-the-art of statistical software (SPSS-PC 4.0) the raw data file was analyzed. Basic frequency distributions were prepared to detect the presence of any data errors that could have occurred during keypunching. A sample of cases were checked for accuracy. Complete protection and confidentiality of the survey database was assured during all phases of data analysis. Access to database was limited to consultant only. The same statistical software used in data analysis was used to generate tables for inclusion in this final report. The report contains frequency distributions of all closed - ended survey questions and business characteristics. Crosstabulations of survey questions by business characteristics were also completed and analyzed. All of the questions were crosstabulated by the age and size of business. The consultant reviewed the crosstabulations to detect any patterns of statistical significance. No noteworthy patterns were detected in the analysis. 9 Public Management Associates �51D -9y Southlake Business Needs Survey - 1995 5 Own 52.8% Lease 47.2% A 1 1 31 24.2% 25.3% 7.6% . 17.0% 7.1% 3.3% 3.8% 1.6% W a W C C m W G O Lii . W W O` H L ._ O ~ ~ W S = C (A Z N m C Public Management Associates "D U-9u Own or Lease Building Southlake business operators are about equally divided between those who own and those who lease their building. Location of Customers The largest percentages of customers come from the Metroplex and NE Tarrant County. Southlake businesses also have strong Southlake and national customer bases. Southlake Business Needs Survey - 1995 6 Full-time Employees The largest percentage of businesses have two full-time employees. Part-time Employees Less than half of the responding businesses employ one or more parttime employees. Percent of Employees Residing in Southlake In approximately one-third of the businesses, 50 percent or more of the employees reside in Southlake. Public Management Associates ,5b- 91 Southlake Business Needs Survey - 1995 7 Lq IN IN o �Z M N p1 O N N i[f n J x 8 Z �x N .„i N N n 0 J Public Management Associates Percent of Employees Residing in NE Tarrant County Almost forty-five percent of the businesses employ at least half of their employees from NE Tarrant County. Percent of Employees Residing in Other Metro Areas Less than half of all businesses employ residents from other areas of the Metroplex. Source of Employees By far, the largest percentage of Southlake business operators use newspaper ads to locate employees. Southlake Business Needs Survey - 1995 6-10 years 10 years + 23.1 % 18.7% Less than 1 year 10.4% 1-5 years 47.8% Corporation 53.2% Other 0.6% Partnership 5.6% Sole prop 40.6% No 62.2% Yes 37.8% Public Management Associates SD S Length of Time in Southlake Fifty-eight percent of the businesses have been in Southlake for five years or less. Type of Business Almost all businesses are either corporations or sole proprietorships. Home -Based Businesses Thirty-eight percent of the businesses are home -based. w 9 Southlake Business Needs Survey - 1995 9 Primary Business Category Services comprise the largest percentage of businesses in Southlake. Public Management Associates �5"J- 9il Southlake Business Needs Survey - 1995 10 One of the areas of interest in the business survey was to assess how business operators viewed Southlake as a business location. Business respondents were asked to indicate how important a number of factors were in relation to the city as a location for business. Table 1 presents the results for those factors that, in some way, are government -related . As may be seen, the most important factors are the city's receptivity to business and the tax structures of the city and county. Utility costs also rate as an important factor. City facilities are seen as being the least important in terms of the city as a location for business. Table 2 present the results for the importance of non -governmental factors. The community's receptivity to business, the growing North East Tarrant County market, and h' P tY g g tY facility cost ranked as the most important factors. Skills of workers, availability of buildings, and education and training were of lesser importance. W� Public Management Associates �J V—/I Southlake Business Needs Survey - 1995 11 Table 1 Percentage Ratings of Southlake as a Location for Business: Importance of Government -Related Factors iF I - i Public Management Associates tl�'Z--j Soudilake Business Needs Survey - 1995 12 Table 2 Percentage Ratings of Southlake as a Location for Business: Importance of Non -Government Factors 12.9 7.1 e 22.3 21.9 S 23.9 7.3 6.0 25.3 16.3 25.3 24.4 29.2 46.2 9.2 15.2 17.4 35.9 8.2 25.7 20.2 24.0 10.3 26.1 18.5 21.2 Co 14.1 5.4 24.5 26.6 29.3 A g it 18.0 8.2 18.6 26.8 28.4 13.6 3.8 15.8 22.3 44.6 8.3 4.4 15.6 33.3 38.3 16.8 8.7 24.5 22.8 27.2 20.2 14.2 29.0 17.5 19.1 26.9 14.3 28.6 14.8 15.4 9 Public Management Associates ,5"a- 9 7 Southiake Business Needs Survey - 1995 13 A X Respondents were also asked to rate seven city services: police, fire, garbage collection and recycling, street maintenance, parks and recreation, building code enforcement, and zoning and land use activities. As Table 3 illustrates, with the exception of street maintenance, all of the services received high positive ratings. The highest ratings went to police and fire services. Public Management Associates "5� -9017 Southlake Business Needs Survey - 1995 14 Table 3 Percentage Ratings of City Services R 9 Public Management Associates Southlake Business Needs Survey - 1995 15 VI WN Ww"M I ii A number of questions addressed the issue of doing business in Southlake. First, respondents were asked if they were pleased with their existing business operation in the city, and 91.4 percent said "yes" (see Figure 1). As Figure 2 shows, almost fifty percent of the businesses in Southlake occupy 1,000-4,999 square feet. Almost equal percentages of business occupy less than 1,000 (25.9 percent) or more than 5,000 (26.5 percent) square feet. When asked about future plans, the largest percentage of respondents (29.3 percent) indicated that they would expand their Southlake location. Seventeen percent of CW those surveyed reported that they had plans to move their business and 5.2 percent said they had downsizing plans (see Figure 3). L Next, respondents were presented with a list of issues and factors that might adversely affect a business. Respondents were asked simply to indicate whether each issue or factor affected them in Southlake (see Figure 4). Factors mentioned most often were county/ISD taxes (59.3 percent), municipal taxes (55.4 percent), zoning (46.8 percent), gas and electric costs (46.3 percent), and water and sewer costs (45.1 percent). Public Management Associates �v-f000 Sou[hlake Business Needs Survey -1995 16 Figure 1 Are You Pleased With Existing Operation in Southlake Yes No 91.4% 6.6% 9 Ik Public Management Associates 0'v-io/ Soutlilake Business Needs Survey - 1995 17 0 Figure 2 How Many Square Feet Does Your Business Occupy in Southlake? 30% 25% z 24.1°A. y ,�.K..aIR.�1-Aa YS ;�.� �� �• . fJw. , � � ��ryk, 20°/ t d• rg�� _ x�� �T ��� ".€a�`��xr I �y+t r o � 10% 0% z z z z z z M O r p p Cr p Opt O h 001 °O11 °01 °� G °1 'a N O 00 O O C O O p Y O Public Management Associates V D —/D"?, Southlake Business Needs Survey - 1995 18 Figure 3 Future Plans for Business Public Mana ement Associates 5D-/D3 9 Southlake Business Needs Survey - 1995 19 A Figure 4 Factors that Adversely Affect Business Operation in Southlake Avail vendorsisuppliers • , t,' L Ability to reach market' " • n. , `'' Transportation access✓w, ; x Zoning 'sa`'.i 2a:n514i �IFi � -•+, � y CounlyASD taxes � Muncipal taxes �t-i ■YesFlnanciny needs �`4 laastelsetirc cost Water/sewer cost Employee training Labor skills 43' A. ` r� Labor availability 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% Public Mana ement Associates Southlake Business Needs Survey - 1995 20 VII.•��S�US' , �. �F.�S'S�A �� � � C��<, � .1T®<l� ;�z �f The final series of questions concerned the interaction between the city and the business community. Fifty-three percent of the businesses surveyed reported that they had contacted the city about a complaint, request for service, or information in the past 12 months (see Figure 5). As shown in Figure 6, the department most often contacted was planning and zoning (18.2 percent), followed by police (16.2 percent), code compliance and building inspections (12.1 percent), and water service (10.1 percent). Sixty-seven percent of those surveyed said their problem or request had been resolved and 97 percent indicated that the staff had been courteous (see Figure 7). Forty-two percent of the businesses surveyed said that they were familiar with the city's Economic Development Office (see Figure 8). As Figure 9 shows, when asked what services or information they would like from the Economic Development Office a majority (67.3 percent) said a business newsletter, followed by permanent city staff/business liaisons (45.3 percent), and a business roundtable (38.1 percent). It Public Management Associates Southlake Business Needs Survey - 1995 21 A m Figure 5 Contact with City of Southlake Public Mana ement Associates " �oLJ Southlake Business Needs Survey - 1995 22 Figure 6 City of Southlake Staff or Department Contacted Rre Department 1 0% rr Parks/Rece Oer#ii 4 $ Economic Dev e� > Yp 9 Mayor/Council >r City Manager ■Yes Water Department Building Inspection Code Compliance Police Planning/Zoning 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% Public Management Associates ���/0 7 RE Southlake Business Needs Survey - 1995 23 Figure 7 Qe Ratings for Contact with City of Southlake Staff e • J ■ Yes Problem resolved ° ■ No 96.9% Staff courteous p� 3.1°k<-x - a 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Public Mana ement Associates �.3--/OF Southlake Business Needs Survey - 1995 24 Figure 8 Familiar with Southlake Economic Development Office? It PI Publicgement Associates �� Ma a/D 9 Southlake Business Needs Survey - 1995 25 A Figure 9 Services or Information Businesses Would Like from Economic Development Office Business Newsletter SAM- /e t Permanent staff liaison 4sa% .1 i L Business Roundtable ■ YCS VAR Educadonttraining programs Agency visitations 219 Y 3 r r��xF 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Public Management Associates SOUTHLAKE BUSINESS SURVEY Southlake as a location for business. 1. Below are a number of factors which commonly influence business and industrial location decisions. Please rank these factors based upon their relative importance in your decision to continue operating your business within the City of Southlake. 1 is not important, 2 is somewhat important, 3 is important, 4 is rather important, and 5 is very important. Not Neutral Important A. Access to markets 1 2 3 B. Cost/quantity of water/sewer 1 2 3 C. Cost/quantity of gas/electric 1 2 3 D. Community receptivity to 1 2 3 business E. City gov't receptivity to 1 2 3 business F. buying power of 1 2 3 Cive nts G. Proximity to D/FW Airport 1 2 3 H. Productivity/skills of workers 1 2 3 I. City facilities/parks 1 2 3 J. Cost of living 1 2 3 K. Diversity of housing stock 1 2 3 L. Availability of capital 1 2 3 M. A growing market in 1 2 3 Northeast Tarrant County area N. Municipal tax structure 1 2 3 O. County/ISD tax structure 1 2 3 P. Cost of facility 1 2 3 Q. Accessibility to major 1 2 3 transportation networks R. Availability of existing 1 2 3 buildings S. bility of education and 1 2 3 Win tr g opportunities Very Important 4 5 4 5 4 5 4 5 4 5 4 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 IJ y 5 II. City Services 2. The following is a list of City services. Please rate each quality of service by circling a number between 1 and 5 which corresponds with the appropriate response. 1 is poor, 2 is fair, 3 is average, 4 is good, and 5 is excellent. A. Fire service B. Police service C. Garbage collection/recycling D. Street maintenance and repair E. Parks/recreational services F. Building code/ enforcement G. Zoning & land use activities Poor 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Excellent 4 5 4 5 4 5 4 5 4 5 4 5 4 5 III. Doing Business in Southlake 3. Are you pleased with your existing operation in Southlake? 1. YES 2. NO 4. What do you like best about doing business in Southlake? 5. Approximately, how many square feet does your business occupy in Southlake (if more than 1 facility in Southlake, please give the total of all facilities.)? square feet 6. Do you have plans to expand at your present Southlake location? 1. YES 2. NO (Please answer 6a) 6a. Do you have plans to downsize at your present Southlake location? 1. YES 2. NO 7. Do you have plans to move your business location from Southlake? 1. YES (Please answer 7a) 2. NO 7a. What is the primary reason causing your business to move from Southlake?. Do any of the following issues adversely impact your operation in Southlake? Please circle the appropriate response. A. Labor availability B. Labor skills C. Employee training D. Water/Sewer utility cost and service E. Gas/Electric utility cost and service F. Financing needs G. Municipal taxes H. County/ISD taxes I. Zoning J. Access to transportation networks K. Ability to reach markets and customers L. Availability of vendors and support services M. Other YES 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9. Have you or a member of your staff contacted the City of Southlake about a complaint, request for service, or for information in the past 12 months? 1. YES (Go to Q. 9a-c) 2. NO (Skip to Q. 10) 9a. Who in the city did you contact last, what person or office? 1. City Manager 7. Planning/zoning 2. Mayor or Council 8. Building inspections 3. Economic Development 9. Code compliance 4. Water department 10. Police 5. Finance office 11. Fire 6. Parks and recreation 12. Other NO 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 9b. Were the people you contacted courteous? 1. YES 2. NO 9c. Did the call resolve your problem, request, or question? 1. YES 2. NO 10. Are you familiar with the City of Southlake's Economic Development Office ? 1. YES 2. NO 11. Please indicate which of the following types of information or services you would like to receive from the Southlake Economic Development Office? YES NO A. Business roundtable meetings 1 2 B. Business newsletter 1 2I C. Education/training programs 1 2 D. Agency visitations 1 2 E. City staff assigned as a permanent liaison to the business community 1 2 IV. Business Characteristics 12. Do you own or lease the building in which your primary operation is located? 1. Own 2. Lease 13. Where do you perceive that the majority of your customers come from? (Circle only one.) 1. Southlake 5. Texas 2. Northeast Tarrant County 6. Southwest region 3. Tarrant County 7. National 4. Metroplex 8. International 14.Approximately, how many people do you currently employ in Southlake (If several facilities, total employees at all sites).? # Full-time # Part-time 15.Approximately what percentage of your employees reside in: % A. City of Southlake % C. Other areas % B. Northeast Tarrant County of Metroplex 16. Circle all sources below that you use to obtain your employees: 1. Newspaper want -ads 4. School/University 2. Texas Employment Commission Placement 3. Private employment agencies 5. Vo-techsfTSTCs 6. Other 17. How long have you been in business in Southlake? 1. Less than 1 year 3. 6-10 years 2. 1-5 years 4. More than 10 years 18. Which of the following bgat describes your Southlake business? 1. Sole proprietorship 4. Cooperative 2. Partnership 5. Other 3. Corporation 19. Which of the following best describes your prima business category? (Circle only one.) 1. Agriculture/Forest/Fishing 7. Retail trade (e.g. restaurants, 2. Mining, Natural Resources general merchandise) 3. Construction 8. Finance/Insurance/Real 4. Manufacturing Estate 5. Transportation 9. Services (e.g. hotels, 6. Wholesale trade recreation, auto repair, personal) 20. Is your business a home -based business? 1. YES 2. NO If you indicated that you would like information, such as a business newsletter, or a visit from ED staff please give us your name and address. Name: Title: Address: Phone #: Fax #: Please return survey in the postage paid envelope to: Public Management Associates 1906 Azalea St. Denton, TX 76205 sv-113 PC 10-10-19% 08:19AM FROM TO 9181748867% P.02 CITY Ole' SOUTHLAKE 1996 BUSINESS NEEDS ASSESSMENT PROPOSAL { Submitted by: Public Management Associates 624 West University, Suite 181 Denton, TX 76201 September 23,1996 sv-az/ 10-10-19% 08:20AM FRCM TO 918174886796 P.03 PROPOSAL : City of Southlake, Texas Business Needs Assessment 1996 SECTION I. INTRODUCTION A. SUI 1NURY OF THE PROPOSED APPROACH Public Management Associates (PMA) proposes the design, tabulation, analysis, land reporting of a self-administered mail survey of businesses in the City of Southlake. ThOrimary product from the assessment will be a final report delivered to city staff that details the findings of the business survey. Information collected will be designed for use in the city's visioning and strategic planning process. The timeline for project completion will be eight weeks froml.the date the city provides the business addresses to PMA by the city. B. PURPOSE The purpose of this research is to obtain information, opinions, and concerns from a broad spectrum of businesses in the City of Southlake. This information can be used by (city staff to assess the degree of satisfaction among business owners with specific components of the business and development climate in Southlake and city development programs and services. C. OBJECTIVES A mail survey of the city's approximately 600 businesses will be conducted to obtain information on areas that will increase the city's understanding of its business owners. Tl c survey will be administered using a questionnaire developed by the consultant and city ci onomic development staff. The primary objectives of this are to: • Assess business owners' opinions, ideas, and concerns about city policies, prooms, and services that affect businesses and the business climate in the community; • Obtain reasons why new businesses located in and existing businesses remained in Southlake; • Ask questions pertaining to future location and expansion plans of area businesses_ • Develop a classification of business types located in Southlake. f 10-10-1996 09:51AM FROM TO 9191748%796 P.02 II. ADMINISTRATIVE WORK P AN Task 1: Survey Jnstrument• _Design and Content The development of the business needs survey questionnaire will be the responsibility of the consultant, based on input from city staff. This input will be used to develop a quality) survey instrument, adhering to the standard techniques of instrument design and question construction. A final, camera-ready copy of the survey will be produced by the project team. As well, the consultant will design a postcard reminder to help increase survey response r te. i Task 2: Administe . 02 e surygy Instrument The consultant will oversee survey administration. The data will be collected by means of a three -step mail survey to local businesses. The city will provide a mailing list of all 1 businesses. First, all businesses will be sent a survey questionnaire and cover letter. Second, all businesses will be sent a postcard reminding them of the survey and asking for their cooperation one week after the questionnaire is first mailed. Third, those agencies not responding to the initial request for information and postcard follow-up will be sent a second questionnaire approximately three weeks later. The three-phase approach to the business needs survey i standard for mail surveys and should produce an acceptable response rate. The Southlake Chamber of Commerce will be responsible for reproducing the survey instrument and all mailings. All questionnaires will be returned directly to the consultant. i Tea li 3: Coding and editing of survey_ questionnaires Upon receiving the completed survey questionnaires, the consultant will manually and edit all instruments. Extraneous or invalid responses will be corrected and any neeess coding will be performed. Survey questionnaires will then be sent to the data entry facility where data will be entered into the computer and transferred to floppy disks. Task 4: Construction and protection of survey database I Using the latest state-of-the-art of statistical software (SPSS-PC 6.0 for windows ) t e raw data file will be analyzed. Basic frequency distributions will be prepared to detect the I presence of any data errors that could have occurred during keypunching. A sample of cas6s will be checked for accuracy and any discrepancies will be corrected. Complete protection and f confidentiality of the survey database will be assured during all phases of data analysis. Adcess to database will be limited to consultant only. Task 5: Data Anal semis and Report Generation The same statistical software used in data analysis wall be used to generate tables foc inclusion in the final report to the agency. Frequency distributions for each survey questaor� and respondent characteristics will be developed. Cross -tabulations of each question by selected respondent characteristics (business ownership type, business category, years in operation to Southlake, etc.) will be included in the analysis. The final report will include an executive summary and an explanation, of the tabular analysis. i TOTAL P.02 10-10-1996 08'21AM FROM TO 918174886796 P.05 SECTION III PROJECT COST AND PAYMENTS The firm -fixed fee for the project is $3,200. TOTAL P.05 5D - /82- 0 City of Southlake, Texas October 10, 1996 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Lou Ann Heath, Director of Finance SUBJECT: Award of Bid for Janitorial Services On Wednesday, October 9, 1996 the City of Southlake received bids from 10 vendors for janitorial service. The janitorial contract is for all City facilities, including the main City Hall building, the City Hall annex, the Community Building and Lodge at Bicentennial Park, plus the newly acquired Public Works Facility on Continental Blvd. The Public Works Facility Annex, the small house adjacent to the new Public Works Facility originally was included as a part of the Request for Bid. Bob Whitehead, Public Works Director, indicated that this building would not require janitorial services at this time, and was not considered in the final bid evaluation. The contract specifies an initial one year contract period with the City's option, on an annual basis, to continue the contract for up to two additional years. On October 3, a pre -bid conference and tour of the facilities was conducted with 11 companies attending. Evaluation of the bids was based on several criteria: price; special needs and requirements of the City; results of reference checks; past performance with the City; and staff evaluation of the bidder's ability to perform. The low bid of $13,138.56 annual charge was received from Mertz Maintenance, a Fort Worth firm. The second low bid was received from Building Contractors Inc. of Carrollton for $13,177.32 annual charge, or $38.76 more than the lowest bid. Building Contractors Inc. has current contracts with the Town of Addison and City of Carrollton; each city had very favorable comments about the service. Other references contacted also were very complimentary about the company and their professionalism. After evaluation of the financial information submitted by the company, business history, training plan, and reference checks, I am recommending award of bid to Building Contractors Inc. for $13,177.32 annual charge. Their current work for the City of Carrollton and the Town of Addison more closely compares with the type of service that Southlake would require. The current janitorial contract expires at the end of October, therefore the Council will need to take action at their October 15 meeting to award the contract to Building Contractors Inc. for one year beginning November 1, 1996. Please place this item on the agenda for Council consideration. 5 E-1 City of Southlake Bid Tabulation Bid Project: Janitorial Services Contract Bid Date: October 9, 1996 Bid Opening: 10:00 a.m. Total Bid Vendor Monthly Annual 1 Mertz Maintenance 1,094.88 13,138.56 2 Building Contractors, Inc. 1,098.11 13,177.32 3 Sani-Tech, Inc. 1,175.23 14,102.76 4 Kemp's Janitorial 1,335.40 16,024.80 5 Tigers Janitorial Service 1,436.59 17,239.08 Al Mar Building Maintenance 1,928.36 23,140.32 James Enterprise 2,007.001 24,048.00 8 Oriental Building Service 2,250.00 27,000.00 9 Professional Polish, Inc. 2,336.40 28,036.80 10 Members Building Maintenance 3,145.00 37,740.00 11 12 { 13 14 15 6-� a CITY OF SOUTHLAKE REQUEST FOR BID JANITORIAL SERVICES CONTRACT Sealed bids will be received by the City of Southlake in the office of the Cily Secretary 1725 F Southlake Boulevard, Southlake. xas 7609 until 10:00 a.m. local time, October 9, 1996, and then publicly opened and read aloud in the City Council Chamber. Bid responses received after the opening time and date will be returned to the sender unopened. The City reserves the right to waive any informalities or to reject any or all bids. The envelope should be marked: City Secretary City of Southlake Janitorial Services Contract A pre -bid conference will be held at 2: 00 p. m. on Thursday, October 3, 1996 at Southlake City Hall Council Chamber, 667 North Carroll Avenue, Southlake, Texas. A tour of the facilities will be available at this time. This will be the only time available to tour the facilities. In submitting the attached bid, including terms, conditions, instructions to bidders and "necifications, the vendor agrees that acceptance of any or all bid items by the City of Southlake, cas within a reasonable period of time constitutes a contract. Bidder's Name: Bidder's Address: Bidder's Telephone Number: Bidder's Facsimile Number: Authorized Signature: Printed Signature: C11-1 A j�> e w L-) N L' bid responses are required to be signed by an authorized representative of the bidding entity. esponses received unsigned will not be considered. 5c_3 CITY OF SOUTHLAKE REQUEST FOR BID JANITORIAL SERVICES CONTRACT JANITORIAL SERVICES PER THE ENCLOSED SPECIFICATIONS City Hall City Hall Annex Community Building Lodge Building Public Works Facility (40w, Public Works Facility Annex TOTAL BID MONTHLY ANNUAL CHARGE CHARGE ::?o /, 05 a,,Z-1 aa,ao 4/3. 31 51Cy, 7a 2, I SD,aB O/n/ pmiT Sc -�, INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS (40." 1. The Bid award shall be based on, but not necessarily limited to, the following factors: a. Price b. Special needs and requirements of the City of Southlake c. Results of reference checks d. Bidder's past performance record with the City e. City's evaluation of the bidder's ability to perform 2. Bids will only be considered from bidders which have an established reputation. A minimum of three years experience in custodial services is required. The City will contact current and previous customers of each bidder to inquire about the bidder's quality of service. Unfavorable references in this regard may be grounds for disqualification. Bidders must demonstrate, with reasonable certainty, capability of furnishing service and providing appropriate insurance. All bids must include the following information and are subject to the following conditions: a. Number of years experience in custodial service. b. Number of years experience in providing custodial services for municipalities. C. Names, addresses, telephone numbers and representatives of at least five current and/or previous customers that have received your service in the last one to five years. d. A statement of financial condition and/or Dun and Bradstreet rating. (48., e. A summary of the history of the business. 3. Questions should be directed to Lou Ann Heath, Director of Finance, metro (817) 481-5581, Extension 716. 4. Any exceptions to the bid are to be clearly indicated on the page entitled, "EXCEPTIONS TO BID" . 5. Site locations within the City of Southlake and approximate building square footage are as follows: Southlake Municipal Complex 667 North Carroll Avenue City Hall City Hall -Annex D:\WP-FILES\PROJECTS\JANITOR.RFP 4 13,100 square feet 820 square feet 5E-5 September 24. 1996 Southlake Bicentennial Park 400 N. White Chapel Blvd. Community Center Southlake Lodge Building Southlake Public Works Facility 1950 E. Continental Avenue Southlake Public Works Facility Annex 1976 E. Continental Avenue 3,825 square feet 700 square feet 3600 square feet 1300 square feet 6. The contract period is for one (1) year, beginning approximately , 1996 through , 1997 with all pricing to remain firm throughout the contract period. The City reserves the right to continue the contract for up to two (2) additional years on an annual basis. 7. The contract may be canceled by either party for any reason upon thirty (30) days written notification. The City may terminate this contract immediately, upon written notification, for unsatisfactory performance by the succesful bidder. Upon termination, a final accounting will be made of the fees payable to the succesful bidder. The City's good faith determination of the amount due in this regard shall be final and binding between the contracting parties. The succesful bidder shall not be entitled to lost or anticipated payments in the event of the City's exercise of such a right. 8. In the event of contract termination or upon completion of the contract, all monies due the successful bidder shall be withheld until the successful bidder has surrendered all the keys issued. 9. The successful bidder will be held fully responsible for the security of keys issued. If at any time during the contract period, or at the termination or completion of the contract, the successful bidder is unable to produce any of the keys issued, the successful bidder shall assume full financial responsibility for changing the affected locks and providing necessary keys for the new locks. If the Building Maintenance Supervisor or any other City employee is called out after hours to open a door, for which a key has previously been issued, the City may deduct from that months bill, an amount deemed equitable to compensate the City for any additional expenses thus incurred. The successful bidder shall not duplicate any key issued without the prior approval of the City. 10. This contract shall not be assigned or transferred by the successful bidder without the prior written consent of the City. 11. The successful bidder will be required to furnish all equipment, labor and supplies necessary to accomplish the assigned task. The successful bidder will be responsible for ensuring that all D:\WP-FILES\PROJECTS\JANITOR.RFP September 24, 19% 5 employees are properly trained in the necessary tasks. Storage of equipment will be permitted on 1te to the extent of the limited space, agreeable to the contract administrator. The contract does (4mv,not include toilet tissue, hand soap, paper towels, trash can liners, etc. These items will be provided by the City. 12. Only employees of the successful bidder, employed for the purpose of performing the assigned task, are to be on the premises while the janitorial services are being performed. Children, spouses, girlfriends/boyfriends, etc. who are not employees of the Succesful bidder, are r=t to be on the premises during the performance of the contracted duties. 13. The successful bidder must provide to the City a list of the names of employees who will be performing the services. This list must be kept current and include employee names and identification information such as driver's license numbers, company issued ID's etc. Employees who are performing services will carry identification at all times. 14. For security purposes the successful bidder shall not employ any person to service this contract who has been convicted of a felony in the last ten (10) years. If an employee is convicted of such a crime while servicing this contract, the employee must be replaced. 15. The successful bidder shall, at its own expense, cover all of its employees under a blanket fidelity bond issued by a bonding agent approved by the City. Each employee shall be covered in a minimum amount of $5,000. �W16. No City owned machines or equipment, such as copiers, facsimile machines, and telephones are to be utilized by the successful bidder. A designated phone will be available for emergency use. 17. The successful bidder shall not use any products, supplies, or equipment which may be injurious or damaging to the surfaces upon which they shall be applied. The successful bidder shall be financially responsible for restoring or replacing any equipment or facilities so damaged. 18. In the process of providing the janitorial services, the successful bidder and/or employees may become aware of information required by law to be kept confidential. Therefore, the successful bidder and/or employees must not at any time disclose, directly or indirectly, to any person, firm, or corporation, any information learned during the performance of their duties. 19. The successful bidder shall be held responsible for any breakage, damage or loss of the City's equipment or supplies resulting from negligence of the successful bidder or his employees while working on the City's premises. The successful bidder shall also be responsible for any breakage, damage or loss of any City employee's equipment which results from any negligent or intentional act of an employee of the succesful bidder. The indemnification provided for herein shall not extend to losses occasioned by the negligence of the City employee. The successful bidder shall D:%WP-FILESTROJECTSUANITOR.RFP September 24, 1996 6 immediately report to the City any damages or loss to the premises in which these janitorial services are performed. If, at any time the City has reason to believe such conditions resulted from acts or omissions on the part of the successful bidder or the successful bidder's personnel, the successful bidder aurees, to the extent permitted by law, to submit all involved personnel to a polygraph examination performed by a designated authority as determined by the contract administrator. Loss, as defined herein, shall also include unauthorized phone use. SAFETY 20. GENERAL: The succesful bidder shall comply with all Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA) Standards and any other Federal, State or Local rules and regulations applicable to construction and/or maintenance activities in the State of Texas. The succesful bidder shall remain solely and exclusively responsible for compliance with all safety requirements and for the safety of all persons and property. The parties hereto expressly agree that the obligation to comply with applicable safety provisions is a material provision of this contract and a duty of the succesful bidder. The succesful bidder shall be responsible for the safety equipment to be used by its employees and/or all of its subcontractors working on the City's property. This equipment will include, but may not be limited to, hard hats, safety belts or harnesses, eye, face, hand, ear and/or hearing protection. The succesful bidder shall immediately notify the City of any hazardous or unsafe condition observed. 21. The successful bidder shall comply with all local, state, and federal laws and regulations related to the performance of the contract to the extent that they may be applicable. 22. Services provided shall comply with the specifications listed in Appendix A. Cleaning tasks required to be performed five (5) days per week will be accomplished Sunday - Thursday, except as noted below in paragraph (23) for the Public Works buildings. During official City Holidays, these five (5) day per week tasks are not required to be performed. Holidays for City employees are as follows: New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Good Friday, Thanksgiving (2 days), and Christmas (2 days). Due to sleep schedules and other special concerns, cleaning of the Fire Services area will be limited to offices and the day room. Fire personnel will clean the kitchen, bathroom and bunk area in the Fire Services area. 23. All contracted services are to be accomplished during normal non -working hours of City staff, except as noted below. Due to scheduling of night meetings, the preferred working hours for all facilities except the Public Works buildings, are between 10:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. The Public Works Facility and Public Works Facility Annex will only be available for contracted services between the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. D:\WP-FILES\PROJECTS\JANITOR.RFP September 24, 19% 7 5E — 00 �W21, A minimum of one English speaking person is to be included in each work group to allow 'or communication with City Staff. 24. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS: Except as otherwise specified in this contract, the succesful bidder and his subcontractors of any tier, will be required at their own expense to maintain in effect at all times during the performance of the work, insurance coverage with limits not less than those set forth below. The insurance coverage shall be with insurers and under forms of policies satisfactory to the City of Southlake. It shall be the responsibility of the succesful bidder and any subcontractors to maintain adequate insurance coverage and to assure that all subcontractors are adequately insured at all times. Failure of the succesful bidder and his subcontractors to maintain adequate coverage shall not relieve him of any contractual responsibility or obligation. CERTIFICATES OF INSURANCE At the time of the execution of this contract and each subcontract, but in any event, prior to commencing work at the job site, the succesful bidder and his subcontractors shall furnish the City with certificates of insurance as evidence that the policies providing the required coverage and limits of insurance are in full force and effect. The certificates of insurance shall state the City as an Additional Insured except for Worker's Compensation. The certificates shall provide that any company issuing an insurance policy for the work under this contract shall provide no less than t i (30) days advance notice in writing of cancellation, non -renewability, or material change in the policy of insurance. In addition, the succesful bidder shall immediately provide written notice to the City of Southlake upon receipt of notice of cancellation of an insurance policy or a decision to terminate or alter any insurance policy. All certificates of insurance shall clearly state that all applicable requirements have been satisfied including certification that the policies are of the "occurrence" type. COMPREHENSIVE GENERAL LIABILITY This insurance shall be an occurrence type policy written in comprehensive form and shall protect the succesful bidder and his subcontractors and the Additional Insured against all claims arising from bodily injury, sickness, disease, or death of any person, other than the succesful bidder's employees, or damage to property of the City of Southlake or others arising out of the act or omission of the succesful bidder or his subcontractors of their agents, employees, or subcontractors. This policy shall also include protection against claims insured by usual personal injury liability coverage, endorsed to insure the contractual liability assumed by the succesful bidder and his subcontractors under the articles entitled indemnification and completed operations, products liability, contractual liability, broad form property coverage, XCU, premise/operations, and independent contractors. Liability limits shall be: $500,000 per occurrence. D:\WP-FILES\PROJECTS\JANITOR.RFP September 24. 1996 8 COMPREHENSIVE AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY �W,This insurance shall be written in the comprehensive form an d nd shall protect the succesful bidder, his subcontractors and the Additional Insured against all claims for injuries to members of the public and damage to property of others, arising from the use of motor vehicles licensed for highway use, whether they are owned, non -owned, or hired. The liability shall not be less than: $500,000 per occurrence. WORKERS COMPENSATION AND EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY This insurance shall protect the succesful bidder, his subcontractors and the Additional Insured against all claims under applicable state workers compensation laws. The insured shall also be protected against claims for injury, disease, or death of employees which, for any reason, may not fall within the provision of workers compensation laws. The liability shall not be less than the statutory limits. INDEMNIFICATION For the consideration included in the bid price, succesful bidder and his subcontractors shall pay, indemnify, and save harmless, the City, its agents, guests, consultants, invitee, and employees, from all suits, actions, claims, demands, losses, expenses, including attorney's fees, costs and judgements of every kind and description to which the City, its agents, guests, consultants, nvitee, or employees may be subjected to, by reason of injury or death, persons or property amage, resulting from or growing out of any act of commission, omission, negligence, or fault of the succesful bidder and his subcontractor's performance hereof, or of any work performed hereunder, or any negligent act or omission of the City, its employees, and officers. Succesful bidder and his subcontractors shall indemnify and save harmless the City, its agents, or employees and consultants, from and against all claims, demands, actions, suits, damages, losses, expenses, costs including attorney's fees, and judgements of every kind and description arising from, based upon, or growing out of the violation of any Federal, state, county or city law, bylaw, ordinance or regulation by the succesful bidder, its agents, trainees, invitee, servants, and employees. WAIVER OF SUBROGATION The succesful bidder and his subcontractors shall require their insurance carrier, with respect to all insurance policies, to waive all rights of subrogation against the City of Southlake, its commissioners, partners, officials, agents, and employees and against all other contractors and subcontractors. 7:\WP-FILES\PROJECTS\JANITOR.RFP September 24, 1996 9 25. A Pre- Bid conference will be held at 2:00 p.m. , on Thursday. October 3 it the Southlake Citv Hall, 667 North Carroll Avenue, Southlake, Texas 76092. A tour of the acilities will be available at this time. This will be the only time available to tour the facilities. 26. Bids submitted with a charge per square foot will be considered as non -conforming bids and not considered for award. Bidders may include square footage calculations on a "for informational purposes only" basis. 27. Bidders are advised that the successful bidder will not be permitted to dispense promotional information in any form. This includes religious tracts, stickers, political information or support for or against any cause or advertisements. 28. The succesful bidder must furnish a working supervisor whose duty will be to oversee the work performed by the custodial staff. The supervisor will be the contact person that will be notified when problems arise. This individual will be available to inspect the facilities with the City's building Maintenance personnel on a monthly basis. The succesful bidder will provide a daytime and after hours phone number for this supervisor. The succesful bidder shall fill out a daily check list on all cleaning functions that have been completed for each building cleaned. Failure to complete the check list may result in nonpayment for that day. The facilities assigned to the succesful bidder will be inspected by the City's building maintenance personnel and written reports will be prepared which reflect any deficiencies or exceptional services provided. The succesful bidder will respond to and correct problems brought to the succesful bidder's attention within twenty-four (24) hours of notification. 29. In consideration of the services performed under this contract, the City agrees to pay the succesful bidder an annual sum not to exceed the amount quoted the City, to be paid monthly upon receipt and approval of the succesful bidder's monthly invoices. All services shall be performed to the satisfaction of the City and the City shall not be liable for any payment under this Contract for services which are unsatisfactory and which have not been approved by the City. Payment may be made on a monthly basis. The succesful bidder shall submit a bill to the finance office on or before the first of each month for the previous month's work. Payment may be made on or before the 15th of each month for the previous month's work providing the finance office receives the bill prior to the first of the month. 30. The successful bidder shall be an independent contractor of the City. 31. The successful bidder, in performing the services required of it, shall comply. with all applicable federal, state and City statutes, ordinances, and regulations. If such compliance is impossible for reasons beyond its control, the successful bidder shall immediately notify the City of that fact and the reasons therefor. D:\WP-FILES\PROJECTS\JANITOR.RFP September 24, 19% 10 APPENDIX A SPECIFICATIONS SCOPE AND INTENT: The intent is to establish contract pricing for cleaning services for various municipal buildings. REQUIREMENTS (ALL LOCATIONS): SUPPLIES: The City will provide supplies for the various dispensers in each building, including paper towels, toilet paper, hand lotions, soaps, and air fresheners. WINDOW CLEANING: Window cleaning inside and out is to be accomplished during non- working hours of City Staff. The windows are to be cleaned once per month for a maximum of twelve (12) times per year. CARPET SHAMPOOING: Carpets are to be shampooed a maximum of two times per year during non -working hours of City staff. The contract administrator will determine when the carpeting is to be cleaned during the contract year. The contract administrator will notify the succesful bidder of the date on which shampooing must be accomplished. The contract administrator shall provide the succesful bidder with reasonable notice of the required shampooing date. ,DAILY TASKS 5 DAY PER WEEK OFFICE AREAS -- ALL FACILITIES (Sun thru Thurs; No Holidays) a. Sweep/dry mop all non carpeted areas. b. Vacuum all carpeted areas. c. Sweep and mop all tiled floors using disinfectant on restroom floors. d. Clean and disinfect toilets, urinals, basins, and counters in restrooms. e. Polish restroom metal fixtures. f. Treat water deposit build up on fixtures and toilets. g. Clean mirrors. h. Clean and sanitize all water fountains. I. Clean all countertops and sinks in kitchen areas. j. Spot clean exterior of all appliances, microwaves, refrigerators, etc. k. Clean all entrance doors and entryways to buildings. 1. Empty and clean all ashtrays located at entryways. m. Spot clean walls, doors, kickplates and light switches. D:\WP-FILES\PROJECTS'JANITOR.RFP September 24, 19% 11 FRIDAY/SATURDAY (No Holidays) (Bicentennial Park buildings and City Hall Dispatcher's Area) a. Empty all trash containers and dispose of in the appropriate dumpster. b. Vacuum all carpeted areas including under desks. c. Sweep/dry mop any non -carpeted areas. d. Sweep and wet mop any soiled areas. e. Dust ledges, flat surfaces, office furniture, etc. WEEKLY TASKS -- ALL FACILITIES a. Clean the interior of all microwave ovens in each building. b. Heavy clean all bathrooms, kitchens, break rooms and cove base. c. Dust all pictures and wall hangings. d. Dust all air vents. e. Clean all baseboards and kickplates. f. Vacuum/dust all chairs, desks, file cabinets and other furniture. g. Dust mini -blinds. h. Remove all cobwebs. MONTHLY TASKS -- ALL FACILITIES a. Tile floor areas are to be stripped, waxed, and buffed using non-skid materials. (Saturday or Sunday only) b. Fire Bay floor area is to be stripped and waxed using non-skid materials. (Succesful bidder will notify Fire services at least 3 days prior to this operation to coordinate vehicle movement) D:IWP-FILESIPROJECTSUAYITOR.RFP 12 September 24, 1996 �,5Z7_13 BUILDING CONTRACTORS INCORPORATED REFERENCES 1. City of Carrollton q,r,r M •d� ' 1945 Jackson Rd. ago-, -Cl 6 M' Carrollton, Texas 75011 Contact person - Carl Shelton Phone - (214) 4 66-3451 YLL, L 2. Oxy TowererY.z�i �; v�, J_�2,/ o' .�, c� �)c.• �c+_ c:t ¢ 5�; 5`�L`..� '7. ti,.lil< L.�(Zr 1. .�. f`L '•�iU ILKJL:. •'" 5005 LBJ Freeway t �, Dallas, Texas c��r� •.;t' a 1c��er , }Zw c J� C,�i� ir,>>c(."�:_ Contact person - John Palmer aLI-LL Qt L4 C,���,. Phone - (214) 450-4992in�n ti 3. Town of Addison 6,00d tr�� 16801 Wes t grove Dr. hax%t ua 4 tWtW `C) Addison, Texas 75001 AQ4, C1Vd_LO Contact person - John Godley M1 Phone - (214) 450-2842A�m-4U� 4. B1oodCare *44WL U4 t4� �9000 Harry Hines ''`6Dallas Texas I i �1. i�wU�L�. j `L Contact person - Earl Gr t use �►,OQO bc� Phone - (214) 351-8111 �! 4 �'5.-Peterbuilt-Motors = 1700 Woodbrook Denton, Texas 76205 Contact person - Don Busch Phone - (817) 591-4185 *ADDITIONAL REFERENCES AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST* A 10—Oa-1996 14:03 9729911060 CORNWELL JACKSON & CO P.03/05 P E : i.. f fir; ; E'� A 6ZY For cnt clsi: Only To the Stockholders and Board of Directors, Building Contractors, Inc. Dallas, Texas We have compiled the accompanying balance sheet of Building Contractors, Inc. as of December 31, 1995, and the related statements of operations for the year then ended, in accordance with Statements on Standards for Accounting and Review Services issued by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. A compilation is limited to presenting in the form of financial statements information that is the representation of management. We have not audited or reviewed the accompanying financial statements and, accordingly, do not express an opinion or any other form of assurance on them. Management has elected to omit substantially all of the disclosures and the statement of cash flows required by generally accepted accounting principled. If the omitted disclosures and the statement of cash flows were included in the financial statements, they might influence the user's conclusions about the Company's financial position, results of operations, and cash flows. Accordingly, thus financial statements are not designed for those who are not informed about such matters. October 8, 1996 M 10-08-1996 14:04 9729911060 COPMELL JACKSON & CO P.04/05 BUILDING CONTRACTORS, INC. BALANCE SHEET As Of December 31, 1995 ASSETS CURRENT ASSETS Cash Accounts Receivable Total Current Assets PROPERTY AND EQUIPMENT (net of accumulated depreciation of $14,469) PRELIMINARY For Managomn.nt Use only $ 35,992 246,240 282,232 25,863 ORGANIZATION COSTS (net of accumulated amortization of $726) 1,089 Total Assets S 309,184 LIABILITIES AND EQUITY CURRENT LIABILITIES Accrued Liabilities $ 4,552 Revolving Line of Credit 45,705 Notes Payable 6,014 Total Current Liabilities 56,271 SHAREHOLDERS' EQUITY Common Stock 1,000 Contributed Capital 9,000 Retained Earnings 242,913 Total Equity 2521913 Total Liabilities and Equity $ 309,184 10-08-1996 14:04 9729911060 CORNWELL JACKSON L CO p,OS/05 BLIILDING CONTRACTORS, INC, STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS PRELI 1i19'V hyi For the Year Ended December 31, 1995 For M&woment U5W 0.110 SALES $ 989,148 COST OF SALES 749,156 GROSS PROFIT 239,992 OPERATING EXPENSES Advertising 157 Auto Expenses 5,340 Depreciation and Amortization 7,363 Insurance 24,590 Office Expense 5,123 Legal and Professional 2,620 Taxes 4,717 Telephone 7,962 Travel and Entertainment 1,240 Miscellaneous 1,711 Total Operating Expenses 60— 823 INCOME FROM OPERATIONS 179,169 OTHER INCOME (EXPENSE) Interest Expense (5,165) Other Expense _ _(6,253) Total Other Income (Expense) (11,4 18) NET INCOME $ 167,751 ON BUILDING CONTRACTORS INCORPORATED COMPANY HISTORY BUILDING CONTRACTORS INCORPORATED (BCI) was founded in 1987 by Ms. Esther De Leon. BCI maintains a minority status by virtue of Ms. De Leon's gender and ethnicity. Ms. De Leon has incorporated her female hispanic status to promote the qualities of minority owned businesses, such as BCI. BCI is a Carrollton based company with warehouse space in Downtown Dallas to facilitate a centralized distribution of materials and equipment. (60"Through hard work and atte noon to high quality standards, BCI has entered its ninth year of business with over 300 company employees and staff. BCI's growth has developed from highly motivated staff and on -site management supervision. Maintaining a well trained work force and providing quality cleaning, to insure customer.satisfaction, is one of BCI's major assets. Continual staff training and safety programs for BCI employees facilitate in the cleanliness and safety for each of our respective clients. BCI's administrative support is unparalleled. BCI's ability to communicate and coordinate the efforts of all A A departments, maintains each of our accounts with as little direction from the client or prospective client as possible. BCI's ability to react quickly and decisively to the changing demands of the commercial cleaning industry enables us to develop and satisfy a wide array of clients. BCI stands ready to accept your challenges in the janitorial service business. 5ze--AF BUILDING CONTRACTORS INCORPORATED TRAINING PROGRAM Building Contractors Incorporated (BCI) places a great emphasis on the selection and training of all personnel. Special emphasis is placed on the training and development of supervisory personnel. All such personnel receive both formal classroom and on-the-job training. BCI programs are designed to provide thorough education for all levels of BCI personnel. The education process is continual. It begins with all first -line supervisors and completion of various levels of the entire Training program are prerequisites to career .1vancement . As such, the BCI Training program provides a complete education in the fundamentals of the cleaning process, principles and application of general management techniques and sophisticated, technological advancement affecting our industry. BCI also conducts seminars on items of interest or concern at periodic intervals during the year. BUILDING CONTRACTORS INCORPORATED SAFETY COMMUNICATION PROGRAM Building Contractors Incorporated (BCI) adheres fully to the requirements of the Occupational Safety and Health Act, as well as to all State -promulgated Safety legislation. Section 1910.1200 of the Act requires that a Right -to -Know Program be instituted to apprise all employees of chemical hazards which the employee may encounter in the performance of his/her job. The Building Contractors Incorporated Safety Communications program is continually updated. Additionally, any special operations are Qe included in a Safety Communications program specific to each building. The programs are prepared in both English and Spanish. If necessary, to suit the needs of our employee population, the NJ program can be translated into any language. S��ai City of Southlake, Texas MEMORANDUM October 10, 1996 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Greg Last, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Approval of Petition to Modify Plat Restrictions in Cimmarron Acres Attached is the "Petition to Modify Plat Restrictions" we have discussed in the past. This petition, when filed in the County Deed Records, will remove the restriction prohibiting access to Jordan Drive from the property purchased by the City. You will note the wording proposed in the document will allow access from the residential lots that we are providing for. This document was prepared by City Attorney Wayne Olson. The statutes require that 75% of the landowners within the subdivision sign the document and this has been accomplished. We will need to add an additional page with the Mayor's signature on behalf of the City as an owner of lots within this addition. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me or Bob Whitehead. GL/gl L:\WP-FILES\WWO\STAFF\CEH\CIM-ACRI.WPD 5r-I PETITION TO MODIFY PLAT RESTRICTIONS Qe STATE OF TEXAS § COUNTY OF TARRANT § We the undersigned, being owners of the below described property in Cimmarron Acres, hereby petition to modify the restrictions pertaining to the plat of Cimmarron Acres as recorded in Volume 388-181, Page 8, Tarrant County Plat Records on January 9, 1985, modifying the following restriction as it applies to Lots 5 and 6, Block 3, Cimmarron Acres: "No access to Jordan Drive will be permitted from Lot 5 and Lot 6 of Block 3," to read as follows: "Only lots with single-family residential zoning shall be permitted access to Jordan Drive." Following this modification, access to Jordon Drive will be permitted from Lot 5 and Lot 6, Block 3 or platted revisions of Lot 5 and Lot 6, Block 3, provided that the lots have single-family residential zoning. This petition shall be filed as a dedicatory instrument with the county clerk of Tarrant County, Texas. Witness my/our hands this day of 11996. ame Lot Block Address 311 a Jon��N 7 1 3 QV1 LAWP-FILEs\ESMT-ROW: PV1PV\CIMPET►T.ION - August 13, 1996 5 F - -.;I-- &70-P aq- eb &- -/ .R, 0 / Z_11_�/ � � Z � 1, Page I of 2 A S-)0C) 6xew 3fl« 61Z.4y 131 certify that the above instrument is a true and correct copy of a petition to modify restrictions executed by the owners of at least seventy- five percent (75%) of the real property in Cimmarron Acres, and that all record owners of property in this subdivision were notified of this proposed modification by hand delivery or regular mail. SUNSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me the undersigned authority on this c�p day of , 1996. -d - -- ?o��pr pG LAURIE M. SHEETS * * Notary Pubnc Notary Public in and or a State of Texas � STATE OF TEXAS My Comm. Exp. 1M0/99 L:\WP-FILES\ESMT-ROW.-Pv\PV\CIMPETIT.ION - August 13, 1996 Page 2 of 2 -15f--3 QW, STATE OF TEXAS PETITION TO MODIFY PLAT RESTRICTIONS § COUNTY OF TARRANT § We the undersigned, being owners of the below described property in Cimmarron Acres, hereby petition to modify the restrictions pertaining to the plat of Cimmarron Acres as recorded in Volume 388-181, Page 8, Tarrant County Plat Records on January 9, 1985, modifying the following restriction as it applies to Lots 5 and 6, Block 3, Cimmarron Acres: "No access to Jordan Drive will be permitted from Lot 5 and Lot 6 of Block 3," to read as follows: "Only lots with single-family residential zoning shall be permitted access to Jordan Drive." Following this modification, access to Jordon Drive will be permitted from Lot 5 and Lot 6, Block 3 or platted revisions of Lot 5 and Lot 6, Block 3, provided that the lots have single-family residential zoning. This petition shall be filed as a dedicatory instrument with the county clerk of Tarrant County, Texas. Witness m /our hands this %I Y day of ��2&� 1996. AXIMPET1T.10N - August 13, 1996 Lot Block 5 r -¢ Page 1 of 2 Address 31 1 a�o Wi /fie/ ,certify that the above instrument is a true and correct copy of a petition to modify restrictions executed by the owners of at least seventy- five percent (75%) of the real property in Cimmarron Acres, and that all record owners of property in this subdivision were notified of this proposed modification by hand delivery or regular mail. SUBSCRIUBED AND SWORN to before me the undersigned authority on s day of 1996. 1°°°�1O�oem LAURIE M. SHEETS * * Notary Public STATE OF TEXAS my comm. EXp. iQto 0 x, W�- " - ems. Notary Public in a of Texas A:\CIMPETIT,ION - August 13, 1996 Page 2 of 2 sF--s Date: August 13, 1996 To: Homeowners & Landowners in Cimmarron Acres Re: Removal of Access Restriction for Residential Properties fronting on Jordan Drive in Cimmarron Acres From: Bob Whitehead, Public Works Director As we have discussed in various meetings during the negotiations regarding development of a ground storage water facility, the City has agreed to a rezoning proposal on the property we have purchased which will provide for four residential lots fronting on Jordan Drive. (See attached exhibit showing proposed rezonings). One remaining provision that needs to be addressed is the removal of the access limitation (to Jordan Drive) from the proposed residential properties. Attached you will find a "Petition to Modify Plat Restrictions" which will accomplish this. The petition would be filed in the county records and would allow for drive access to Jordan drive from the residential lots only. The City must be able to sell these residential lots with access to Jordan Drive. If this petition cannot be executed, we will not be in a position to finalize the residential zoning portion of the project. A resident in your subdivision, NAME HERE, has volunteered to route this petition for signatures. We appreciate your cooperation in this effort. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (817) 481-5581, ext 741. Sincerely, City of Southlake Bob Whitehead, Public Works Director enc. Exhibit showing proposed rezonings on City property Petition to Modify Plat Restrictions cc: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager 24 City of Southlake, Texas Iaa: 2ute : -NAIRu October 11, 1996 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Bob Whitehead, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Resolution No. 96-65, Providing for a Moratorium on Conditional Sign Permits for Readerboard Signs BACKGROUND At the October 1, 1996 Regular City Council Meeting, Council expressed a concern about the proliferation of readerboard signs in Southlake. City Councilmembers and Staff will review the provisions in the Sign Ordinance which allow "readerboard" signs. In the meantime, Council asked that Staff bring to them a resolution establishing a moratorium on permitting any readerboard sign. The attached Resolution No. 96-65 is to provide for Council to place a moratorium on readerboard signs. RECOMMENDATION Please place Resolution 96-65 on the Regular City Council Agenda for October 15, 1996 for City Council review and consideration. BW/ls attachment: Resolution 96-65 C.I WPW IN60\W PDOCS\RES\9WMS.MEM S6_ 1 OCT-11-1996 12:13 FIELDING+BARRET & TAYLOR 8173324741 P.02iO4 No RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION DECLARING A NINETy (") DAY MORATORIUM ON TB E ISSUANCE OF PERMTI'S FOR RFADERBOARD SIGNS; DIRwmcir THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE TO CONDUCT INVESTIGATIONS AND TO -REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL AS On 1; 1ITIOUSLY AS POSSIBLE ITS ItECOMM ENDAUONS ROATINGTO A,PMOMUTE LOCATIONS ANI) REGULATIONS FOR SUCH SIGNS WITHIN THE cm; PROVIDING FOR A M MOD OF REPEAL OF THIS MORATORIUM; AND PROVIDING THAT THIS RESOLUTION SHALL TAKE EFFECT IIUN[EDIATELY UPON PASSAGE WHEREAS, the City Council of the aty of Southlake has adopted Ordhm= No. 506-A as the city's sign ordinance, regulating and restricting the location, setback, height, siz-,li&ting and other use of signs in the City of Southlake; and WHEREAS, the city has received inquiries regarding the placement or use of readerboard signs. within the city at locations which might adversely affect surrounding properties or the proper and orderly growth of the city, and WHEREAS, the city council dewres to maintain the status quo within the city until such time as the city council has had a reasonable time to review the provisions of the sign ordinance, relative to the placement or use of readerboard signs within the city and to take appropriate action as may be required to protect the public health. safety and welfare with regard to the placement or use of such signs; and WSERFAS, a ninety (90) day moratorium placed on the issuance permits for such signs is a minimally intrusive method of maintaining the status quo until such review can be completed. t:\rites\slake\ru\rftbr g-mor (14011-96) �56 -a Page i OCT-11-1996 12:13 FIELDING,BARRET 8 TAYLOR 8173324741 P.03iO4 NOW, TEMEFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY (400", OF SOUTHYAKF, TEXAS: SECTION I. Effective immediately, and for a period of ninety (90) days, no application for a permit Shan be accepted and no permit SW be issued for the erection, placement or use of readerboard signs in the City of Southlake unless an application for the permit was received by the city prior to the passage of this resolution. The purpose of this moratorium is to maintain the status quo within the city until such time as proper regulations have been adopted with regard to such signs, SECMON L The term "permit" as used in this resolution shall mean a license, certificate, approval, registration, consent, permit, or other form of authorisation required by law, rule, regulation, or ordinance that must be obtained by a person in order to perform an action or initiate a project for which the permit is sought. SECTION 3. The city manager is hereby directed to conduct investiations and to report to the city aouncn as tio„siy as possible his recommendations relating to regulations for the placement and use of such signs within the City of Soud ake. SECTION 4L This moratorium shall remain in effect until such time as the city council has had a reasonable opportunity to consider and act upon appropriate amendments to the L'\Eder\stake\res\rdrbedsi.mor (10.11-96) �5(9 -3 pap 2 OCT-11-1996 12:14 FIELDING,BARRET & TAYLOR 8173324741 P.04iO4 comprehensive zoning ordinance with regard to the location and question of such signs. Upon final adoption of these amendments, this moratorium shall expire. This resolution shall automatically expire ninety (90) days from the date of adoption unless it is specifically extended by additional city council action- - MON S. PASSED, APPROVED and EFFECTIVE on this day of 1996. ATTEST: eaey seae+wy f:\fII=Wake\rU\ntZ* -M0r (t0-11-96) Mayor, City of Southlake 56-141 TOTAL P.04 tb City of Southlake, Texas October 10, 1996 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Kim Lenoir, Director of Parks and Recreation SUBJECT: Addendum to Pepsi Contract for Bicentennial Park Scoreboards As you know, the City of Southlake approved a seven year contract with Pepsi last year for six scoreboards for the baseball fields at Bicentennial Park. The Southlake Girls Softball Association requested new scoreboards for the three older fields. Pepsi has agreed to supply three more scoreboards for the softball fields with the addition of three years to the contract. The City attorney's office is drawing up the addendum with the above changes only. Attached is the orginal contract with Pepsi. Please put on the City Council agenda for October 15, authorizing the Mayor to enter into the contract addendum with Pepsi to provide for Bicentennial Park three additional scoreboards. You may contact me at 481-5581, extension 757, if you have any questions. OFFICIAL RECORD CONTRACT This Contract entered into as of the 6th day of February 1996, by and between the City of Southlake (Park and Recreation Department), a municipal corporation of the State of Texas, with its principal place of operation located at 1725 E. 1709, Southlake, Texas 76092, hereinafter referred to as ("Customer"), and Pepsi -Cola, hereinafter referred to as ("Pepsi -Cola"), with its principal place of operation at 4532 Highway 67, Mesquite, 'Texas 15150. 11YA i! WHEREAS, Customer owns and operates athletic facilities at Bicentennial Park, in Southlake; and WHEREAS, Pepsi -Cola is licensed to manufacture, sell and distribute certain soft drink beverages (Pepsi -Cola products) within certain designated territories of 'Texas, including Southlake, Texas; and WHEREAS, Pepsi -Cola will provide six (6) signs for the athletic fields in exchange for the City requiring its licensees using Bicentennial Park to serve only Pepsi -Cola products; and WHEREAS, the parties to.wish to set forth in writing the terms of this Contract: Now therefore in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants herein contained, the Parties hereto agree as follows: Consideration. Upon execution of this Contract, Pepsi -Cola will pay $19,900 for six (6) scoreboards for the City of Southlake, all boards to be delivered on or before March 15. Exclusivity. Customer hereby agrees it will require, as a condition of using the City's fields, all concessionaires or associations to sell only Pepsi -Cola carbonated soft drinks at the Bicentennial Park during the term of this Contract any associations or concessionaire shall also be required to buy all of its carbonated soft drink requirements for its operations or functions from Pepsi -Cola. Pepsi -Cola agrees for such term to promptly and fully supply such associations or concessionaires equipment with respect to all cans, syrup and bottles of Pepsi -Cola products, including water and isotonics. Pricing. Pepsi -Cola will sell to Customer's associations or concessionaires, for the term of this Contract, all of their requirements for soft drink fountain syrup, all of the carbon dioxide required to service to the public in connection with the syrup and/or other items to be provided by Pepsi -Cola hereunder, all cups used to serve Pepsi -Cola products Page I [:\file&\%lake\contract\peP+i sr -a for the aforementioned items at the prices listed on attachment A. 'I-Itcse iter►►s shall be subject to price increase only during an indust►y-wide nationally recognized increase, mid not mare often than once every two years. :EMU. 'I1is Contract shall have a term of seven (7) years commencing Y Fein 6, tear 1996, and expiring February 7, 2003. Product Ideutificatiun. Customer grants to Pcpsi-Cola the right to have v:rt ions forms Of product idetltificatiun beating the Pepsi -Cola ttaden►ark, such as, by way of example and not limited to, signs, posters, and sue:uuets prominently placed at alilnt►l►iiate locatit,rts. Placement and appearance of the afo►es:tid materials shall be mutually developed bct%cccn Custonicr and Pepsi -Cola. Pepsi -Cola shall have the right to identify Pepsi -Cola as file exclusive vending soft drink provided at Bicentennial Park. I:duipurcut. Pcpsi-Cola will furnish to associations and concessionaires using; Bicentennial Palk without charge all equipment on an as needed basis. Pepsi -Cola AvilI furnish to customer, without ch:►rge, all c(luipu►cnt necess:►ly to dispense c:u bonate(I soft drink products. Said equiplucut is to be Mutually agreed upon by the Panics, Pepsi -Cola will be responsible for the maintenance and repair of said c(luipntcnt during the terms of this Contract, provided that custourer an(I its employees shall exercise Pt "dent c:►re in the handling and operations of the e(luipmelit. Title to said equipment shall tellmin with Pepsi - Cola and said equipment u►ay be teMuvcd by Pcpsi-Cola upon termination of this Contract. ludo eltdeut Conti, murs. Nothing herein contained shall be deemed to slake or (4w create by and between Customer and 1 cpsi-Cola any relationship of agency or partnership or joint venture. Pepsi-Cula will be responsible for the maintenance and repair of said equipment during the tcrmt of this Contract. 'I'itic to said e(luipnlent shall rearms with Pcpsi-Cola and said equiputent pray be renx►ved by Pepsi -Cola upon termination of this Contract. Events of default. Upon the hslppcuing of any one or more of the following events, this Contact may be cancelled and terminated by the Non -Defaulting Party herct() (tpolt written notice to the other party: A. Any Material, breach of filly one or ruore of the terms of this Contract, which breach is not cured within twenty days of written notice by the aggrieved parfy to the defaulting party. 13. The insolvency, bankruptcy, judicial lig(tidation or reorganization, nppoiult►►ent or receive or trustee, or cot poste dissolution by, or on behalf of either 11a1 ly- t:\files\slake\contract Wer- 5J- _3 rnge 2 Nonassigna� bi�litv_. This Contract is not assignable by either Party without the prior written consent of the other party. This contract shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the Customer and Pepsi -Cola and their respective successors and permitted assigns. Nonwaiver. This Contract contains the entire understanding of the parties thereto and superseded all previous Contracts and understandings between the parties. No failure by either party to exercise any power given the hereunder or to insist upon strict compliance by the other party of any obligation hereunder, and no custom or practice of the parties shall affect either party's rights to demand exact compliance with the terms of this Contract. Cancellation. This Contract may be terminated at any time after 84 months by either party upon thirty (30) days written notice to the other party. Upon termination of this Contract, all equipment, including the scoreboards) furnished by Pepsi -Cola, shall be returned to Pepsi -Cola, except that Customer may purchase the scoreboard(s) on a prorata basis, based on the seven (7) year term of the Contract. if the Contract terminates after 84 months, the scoreboards shall became the property of Customer, without charge. Governing Law. This Contract shall be construed in the accordance with and shall be governed by the laws of the State of Texas. Venue in any proceedings relating to this Contract shall he in Tarrant County. In witnesseth whereof, the Parties hereto have executed this Contract of the date first set forth above by their respective officers hereunto duly authorized. The Parties hereto represent and warrant that they are fully authorized to enter into the transaction contemplated by this Contract and that the representatives of the Parties whose signatures appear below are duly authorized to execute this Contract on behalf of the respective Parties. PEPSI-COLA nth izet prese t:\Oles\slake\contract\pepsi ntative - Title ate Date Page 3 A AITACHMGNT A PRICING $11.00 5-Gallon "Tanks Pepsi Diet Pepsi Mountain Dcw Dr. Slice 20 Lb CO2 $10.50 Plus $25.00 Deposit 12-oz 1.G-oz 22-oz 32-oz 20-oz 2Q-oz f:\rjjcs\sIake\contract\PCjmi CW)S 2000 1000 1200 500 lls or 24 AcluaCna Water 24 Orange Slice Reel Slice Root Beer Lemon Lime Slice �5j- 41.25 32.75 46.50 31.50 11.30 9.50 rose a City of Southlake, Texas October 9, 1996 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Bob Whitehead, Director Public Works Paul Ward, Building Official SUBJECT: Re -appointment of Members Serving on Building Board of Appeals. Members serving in the even numbered places for the Building Board of Appeals are appointed to serve terms expiring October 1,1996. Board members may be appointed to succeed themselves. All members currently serving in the even number places have indicated interest in being reappointed to serve another term. Please consider Kosse Maykus, Eddie Pierce, and Bobby Harrell for reappointment to serve two year terms as members of the Building Board of Appeals. Please place this on the October 15, 1996 Council meeting agenda for the Council's consideration. G BW/PW:dc Attachment: List of Appointed Board of Appeals Members Resolution No. 96-66 cc: Sandra LeGrand, City Secretary City of Southlake, Texas RESOLUTION NO.96-66 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS, APPOINTING MEMBERS TO A BUILDING BOARD OF APPEALS; PROVIDING FOR TERMS; PROVIDING FOR QUALIFICATIONS OF MEMBERS, IN ACCORDANCE WITH ORDINANCE NO. 622; 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, Ordinance No. 622, adopted by the City Council of the City of Southlake, Texas, on September 6, 1994, outlines the appointments to the Building Board of Appeals; and, WHEREAS,Ordinance No. 622 states 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 appointed to places numbered I through 5 and alternate members shall be appointed to places numbered 6 and 7. WHEREAS, currently two year terms of Places 2, 4 and 6 have expired; now, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS, THAT: Section 1. The above premises are hereby found to be true and correct and are hereby incorporated into the body of this resolution as if copied in their entirety. Section 2. The terms of members, Kosse Maykus, Eddie Pierce and Alternated #1, Bobby Harrell, have expired. Under this resolution, the following reappointments are hereby made as allowed for in Ordinance No. 622. 2. 4. 6. Section 3. This resolution is hereby effective upon passage by the City Council. City of Southlake, Texas Resolution No. 96-66 page two PASSED AND APPROVED THIS THE 15th DAY OF OCTOBER,1996. CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS MAYOR RICK STACY ATTEST: SANDRA L. LEGRAND CITY SECRETARY APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY ATTORNEY City of Southlake, Texas BUILDING BOARD OF APPEALS Established by Ordinance No.622 Members Term to Expire Kosse Maykus, Chairman Home: 424-9137 10/96 2604 North Carroll Avenue Work: 329-3111 Southlake, Texas 76092 Michael Lease, Vice Chairman Home: 481-9527 10/97 370 South Peytonville Avenue Work: 329-8957 Southlake, Texas 76092 Don Light Home: 481-5944 10/97 200 Westwood Work: 488-0354 Southlake, Texas 76092 Eddie Pierce Home: 379-5876 10/96 1600 Randol Mill Avenue Work: 481-1508 Southlake, Texas 76092 C.E. "Chuck" Fettinger Home: 481-3397 10/97 3170 Briar Lane Work: 481-5067 Southlake, Texas 76092 Bobby Harrell, Alternate #1 Home: 329-6920 10/96 920 South Peytonville Avenue Work: 329-6920 Southlake, Texas 76092 David Carpenter, Alternate #2 Home: 488-0565 10/97 1211 Oakwood Trail Work: 481-3587 Southlake, Texas 76092 D AVP-FILE S\LISTS\BBOA95. WPD 5-g--� Updated 10/96 City of Southlake, Texas MEMORANDUM October 11, 1996 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Bob Whitehead, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Central Regional Wastewater and Denton Creek Regional Wastewater Systems First Amendment -Interim Diversion Agreement BACKGROUND The City of Southlake and Trinity River Authority of Texas (TRA) entered into an agreement in December of 1989 to allow the City a temporary diversion of wastewater flows from the Denton Creek Regional Wastewater System Service Area to the Central Regional Wastewater System Service Area. The agreement was to expire on November 30, 1996. Wastewater from the Denton Creek Basin will need to be pumped up to a higher elevation to the north of Roanoke for disposal. This system is not in place. The City Council and Staff have been working with TRA to construct the pressure system. TRA is now in the final phase of construction of the pressure system between N. White Chapel Blvd. and the wastewater treatment plant. On May 30, 1996, the City Manager requested that TRA extend the diversion agreement for two years. This will allow the City the time to extend the pressure system from N. White Chapel Blvd. to the east to approximately Shady Lane. The funds have been allotted in the FY96-97 to construct the required force main from the intersection of Dove St. and Lonesome Dove Ave. to the TRA Lift Station which is being constructed on N. White Chapel Blvd. In FY97-98, it is proposed to construct the required force main from Shady Lane and Kimball Ave. to the lift station at Dove St. and Lonesome Dove Ave. The advisory boards from the Central Region and Denton Creek Region have favorably endorsed the City's request. TRA Board of Directors will consider the request on October 23, 1996. AMENDED AGREEMENT The changes to the Diversion Agreement are as follows: Article I, Section 3.02: November 30, 1996 to November 30, 1998 (line 1) Article II, Section 3.04(a): five (5) years to seven (7) years (line 7) Article III, Section 5.03(f): addition of fiscal years: 1997, 1998 and 1999 Article IV, Section 6.06: November 30, 1996 to November 30, 1998 (line 9) Article IV, Section 8.02: November 30, 1996 to November 30, 1998 (line 6) 5L-1 CURTIS E. HAWK 1ST AMENDMENT -INTERIM DIVERSION AGREEMENT OCTOBER 11, 1996 PAGE 2 Article IV, Section 8.03: November 30, 1996 to November 30, 1998 (line 1) RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that City Council authorize the Mayor to enter into the First Amendment of the Trinity River Authority of Texas, City of Southlake Interim Diversion Agreement. Please place this item on the October 15, 1996 Regular City Council Agenda for City Council consideration. 10 attachment: letter from Wayne Hunter, TRA Ast. Regional Manager First Amendment -Interim Diversion Agreement C:\WPWIN60\WPDOCS\TRA\IAMEND.MEM 5 L-2 Mayor: Gary Fickes Mayor Pro Tern: Andrew L. Wambsganss Deputy Mayor Pro Tern: PamelaA. Muller Councilmembers: MichaelT. Richanne W. Ralph Evans Sally R. Hall City Manager. Curtis E. Hawk Assistant City Manager. Shana K. Yelverton City Secretary: Sandra L. LeGrand City of Southlake Administrative Offices May 30, 1996 � 23� 6 )d m JUN 1996 R c , Tra;; Mr. Wayne K., Hunter, P.E. Authoniy of ' exa. Assistant Regional Manager :6ecuiva RZ Northern Region �,.. Trinity River Authority P.O. Box 240 Arlington, Texas 76004-0240 Re: Central and Denton Creek Regional Wastewater Systems Diversion of Wastewater Flows in the City of Southlake Dear Mr. Hunter: As you are aware, the City's original 1987 and 1988 contracts with the TRA to construct the Denton Creek Wastewater Interceptor Pressure System (DCWIPS) included the Lake Turner Municipal Utility District as a participating party. The subsequent bankruptcy involving the Hunt Ranch and its impact on the L.TMUD was one of the major reasons for the delay in the Denton Creek project, and led directly to the Interim Diversion Agreement signed by TRA and the City of Southlake in December, 1989. This Agreement allowed the City to divert wastewater flow from the Denton Creek basin to the Central Regional Wastewater System in the Big Bear Creek drainage basin until November 30, 1996. Since 1990 the City of Southlake has been actively pursuing construction of the DCWIPS to serve.the north side (Denton Creek basin) of the City. Southlake has previously participated in the construction of the Marshall Creek Gravity Sewer. We also have a contractual obligation for the DCWIPS from Marshall Creek to the TRA Pump Station at N. White Chapel Boulevard. This portion of the system is under construction to be completed in fall of 1996. It important to note that the DCWIPS Pump Station is still two and one-half miles from the "diverted flow's" pump station. Therefore, the City requests a two-year extension to the current Interim Diversion Agreement. The information listed below may be helpful to the Authority in giving consideration to our request for an extension. 5 L-3 1725 East Southlake Blvd. • Southlake, Texas 76092 (817) 481-5581 • FAX (817) 488-6796 'AN FOUAL OPPOPTUNITY EMPLOYEP- Mayor. Gary Fickes Mayor Pro Tern: Andrew L. Wambsganss Deputy Mayor Pro Tern: PamelaA. Muller Councilmembers: Michael T. Richarme W. Ralph Evans Sally R. Hall City Manager. Curtis E. Hawk Assistant City Manager: Shana K. Yelverton City Secretary: Sandra L. LeGrand City of Southlake Administrative Offices Wayne K. Hunter May 30, 1996 Page 2 1. Volume of diverted flows under the present agreement and estimate flows for extension: FY Year MG Volume 1992 29.20 1993 32.00 1994 3 5.8 0 1995 44.20 1996 49.70 1997 60.60 1998 60.60 2. Current plans of the City staff to request funding of sanitary sewer improvements to send flows to the Denton Creek System: • FY 96-97 - construct the required force main from the intersection of Dove St. and Lonesome Dove Ave. to the TRA Lift Station which is being constructed on N. White Chapel Blvd. • FY 97-98 - construct the required force main from Shady Lane and Kimball Ave. to the lift station at Dove St. and Lonesome Dove Ave. It is the intent of the City to terminate all of the diverted flows within the next two years. Obviously, until the DCWIPS is completed this cannot happen. I believe our participation in the Marshall Creek project, and our willingness to proceed in the construction of the DCWIPS to Kirkwood, without prior agreement for financial participation with LTMUD, demonstrates our good faith effort to fulfill our contractional obligation. We need additional time. I would be pleased to meet with you to discuss any question you may have. Sincerely, urtis awk, City Manager\ enclosure: map of area 5L-4 1725 East Southlake Blvd. • Southlake, Texas 76092 (817) 481-5581 • FAX (817) 488-6796 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER- CITY' OF SOUTHLAKE 7 T_ I L N ------------- - ---------- -, —A! JULY 1. L T- 54 Stk*ICM Force Pla;r, 7:7 ti. Currcx _yll -FY 7 7 L�J .0.,rl r l ic., rCC..:$ 7_4 a J A410st i -n ME J MI. P IIZ74 If t �4L 4, •CHEATHAM ASSOCIATES1 51-5 Trinity River Authority of Texas r .s , 3828.106/3110.106 Mr. Bob Whitehead Director of Public Works City of Southlake 667 North Carroll Avenue Southlake, Texas 76092 Dear Mr. Whitehead Subject: Central Regional Wastewater and Denton Creek Regional Wastewater Systems First Amendment -Interim Diversion Agreement In response to your request and after having received a favorable endorsement for such from the Advisory Committees for both of the above referenced wastewater systems, we have prepared an amendment to our Interim Diversion Agreement which extends the City of Southlake's right to divert wastewater flows from the Denton Creek Regional Wastewater System service area to the Central Regional Wastewater System service area for an additional two years. We are scheduling action on the agreement in our October 23, 1996 Board of Directors meeting. In advance of this date, we would appreciate the City taking action prior to that date, reporting the action to this office and securing the execution of the six original amendments enclosed herewith: Following our receipt and execution of the amendments, you will be furnished two original executed documents. If you should have any questions please call. N UNTER Assistant Regional Manager Enclosure /df cc: Patricia M. Cleveland, Manager of Operations Debbie A. Basinger, Executive Secretary P O Box 240 Arlington. Texas 76004-0240 . (817) 467-4223 OCT O 4 S_J FIRST AMENDMENT TRINITY RIVER AUTHORITY OF TEXAS CITY OF SOUTHLAKE INTERIM DIVERSION AGREEMENT STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF TARRANT WHEREAS, the TRINITY RIVER AUTHORITY OF TEXAS (hereinafter called "AUTHORITY") has duly exzcuted and entered into an AGREEMENT dated the _ day of December 1989, with the City OF SOUTHLAKE (hereinafter called "City") providing for City's temporary diversion of City's wastewater from the AUTHORITY'S Denton Creek Regional Wastewater System service area to the AUTHORITY'S Central Regional Wastewater System service area to which AGREEMENT reference is hereby made for all purposes; and WHEREAS, the AGREEMENT was structured, in part, to allow the City's temporary diversion to continue through November 30, 1996; and WHEREAS, City has diligently pursued financing, design, and construction of improvements necessary to eliminate the temporary diversion but lack two additional years in its plan to cease diverting wastewater flows; and WHEREAS, City has furnished AUTHORITY, a scheduled of additional improvements required to end the diversion and AUTHORITY has considered City's request for an extension of the term of the diversion; and NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and mutual covenants contained herein, the AUTHORITY and City agree as follows: ARTICLE I This Section 3.02, TEMPORARY DISCHARGE, 1st paragraph, which reads as follows: OMNI.._ —MINlow be OMITTED and DELETED in its entirety, and the following be substituted in its place: From the effective date hereof until November 30, 1998 the City shall have the privilege to discharge into the System, and Authority agrees to accept at the Temporary Point of Entry, eligible wastewater from the interim diversion facility subject to: (1) the terms of the Trinity River Authority of Texas -City of Southlake Regional Wastewater System Contract dated February 25, 1987; and (2) the terms and conditions contained herein including but not limited to the rate of flow limitations and the payments to be made under this Agreement. ARTICLE II That Section 3.04, QUANTITY AT TEMPORARY POINT OF ENTRY, paragraph (a) which reads as follows: (a) The Git;shall bepermittedand the City agrees to discharge from the diversion—faGility to the Temporary Point of Entry, a— maximum rate offofi commensurate with the amount of surplus downstream Gapacity in th ' e Rig Bear Greek intercepter, as established by Authority managemient. i�p . im amount of eligible wastewater flow allowable at any time defined as aA r-Ate in MGP in each of the —five years beginning with FisEasear 1991 shall -be-determined year,annually by Authority management and the City shall be notified ef su determination at least forty (40) days prior to the beginning of eaGh fisGal year. ;SuGh upper limit shall he based upon Authority management judgment at that time, of the amount of surplus Gapacity existing in downstream System. 'Pap- t i es Notwithstanding the faGt that the Authority shall, in advanGe of each fisGal year, furnish to the City a prediGted allowable upper flow define'd as a rate in MGD for the next ensuing > during the course ef t suing fiseal year, other wastewater flows exeeed that whieh was originally I1 pfa�eeted by he Authority, aredetermination will be made by-Auther y Aagement during that period ef time, the City notified of r-Gh redetermined rate of flow, an suGh-not;�Gpe f1r� the -Authe itTthe City agrees toimmediately -reduce—its volume of dissGharge to a.leiei A-1hir-h ram redetermined -by-Adhered Management to be-aGGeptame be OMITTED and DELETED in its entirety, and the following be substituted in its place: (a) The City shall be permitted and the City agrees to discharge from the diversion facility to the Temporary Point of Entry, a maximum rate of flow commensurate with the amount of surplus downstream capacity in the Big Bear Creek Interceptor, as established by Authority management. The maximum amount of eligible wastewater flow allowable at any time defined as a rate in MGD in each of the seven years beginning with Fiscal Year 1991 shall be determined annually by Athority management and the City shall be notified of such determination at least forty (40) days prior to the beginning of each fiscal year. Such upper limit shall be based upon Authority management judgement at that time, of the amount of surplus capacity existing in downstream System facilities. Notwithstanding the fact that the Authority shall, in advance of each fiscal year, furnish to the City a predicted allowable upper flow defined as a rate in MGD for the next ensuing year, if, during the course of that ensuing fiscal year, other wastewater flows exceed that which was originally projected by the Authority, a redetermination will be made by Authority management during that period of time, the City notified of such redetermined rate of flow, and upon receiving such notice from the Authority, the City agrees to immediately reduce its volume of discharge to a level which is redetermined by Authority management to be acceptable. 5 L-8 ARTICLE III That Section 5.03, PAYMENTS City, paragraph (f), 1st paragraph, which reads as follows: Daily Average Flow (MGD) IMIMURIAMB.. be OMITTED and DELETED in its entirety, and the following be substituted in its place: (f) In addition to all payments required to be made by the City under this Agreement, the City agrees and shall be unconditionally obligated to pay to the Authority during each Fiscal Year an excess flow surcharge for a rate of delivery of wastewater in excess of the rate of flow for the years set forth in the following table: Daily Average Flow (MGD) FY 1990 0.07 FY 1991 0.12 FY 1992 0.17 FY 1993 0.22 FY 1994 0.28 FY 1995 0.33 FY 1996 0.38 FY 1997 0.61 FY 1998 0.61 FY 1999 0.00 ARTICLE IV That Section 6.06, FORCE MAJEURE, which reads as follows: NUTIEN ►.WWI XXXX ,.' 5 L-9 '77" C. In- .......... ENRON MM be OMITTED and DELETED in its entirety, and the following be substituted in its place: In case by reason of "Force Majeure" either party hereto shall be rendered unable wholly or in part to carry out its obligations under this Agreement, then if such party shall give notice and full particulars or such "Force Majeure" in writing to the other party within a reasonable time after occurrence of the event or cause relied on, the obligation of the party giving such notice, so far as it is affected by such "Force Majeure", with the exception of the obligation of City to make the payments required in Section 5.O3(f) hereof, the exception of the obligation of the City to discontinue the interim diversion of wastewater no later than November 30, 1998 and the obligation of City to limit the volume of discharge of Eligible Wastewater required in Section 3.04 hereof, shall be suspended during the continuance of the inability then claimed, but for no longer periods, and any such party shall endeavor to remove or overcome such inability with all reasonable dispatch. The term "Force Majeure" as employed herein, shall mean Act of God, strikes, lockouts or other industrial disturbances, acts of public enemy, orders of any kind of the Government of the United States or the States of Texas of any civil or military authority, insurrections, riots, epidemics, landslides, lightning, earthquakes, fires, hurricanes, storms, floods, washouts, droughts, arrests, restraint of government and people, civil disturbances, explosions, breakage or accident to machinery, pipelines or canals, partial or entire failure of water supply and inability on the apart of City to provide water necessary for operation of its combined water and sanitary sewer system hereunder, or of Authority to receive wastewater on account of any other causes not reasonably within the control of the party claiming such inability. It is understood and agreed that the settlement of strikes and lockouts shall be entirely within the discretion of the party having the difficulty, and that the above requirement that any "Force Majeure" shall be remedied with all reasonable dispatch shall not require the settlement of strikes and lockouts by acceding to the demands of the opposing i1,-10 party of parties when such settlement is unfavorable to it in the judgement of the party having the difficulty. ARTM F TV That Section 8.02„ TERMINATION OF SERVICE, 2nd, which reads as follows: be OMITTED and DELETED in its entirety, and the following be substituted in its place: It shall be sufficient cause for the Authority to refuse to receive wastewater as provided herein should the City: (a) Fail to make payments due Authority; or (b) Exceed the maximum rate of flow established by Authority management under Section 3.04. No later than November 30, 1998, the wastewater being diverted to the Authority's Big Bear Creek interceptor pipeline under the terms of this Interim Diversion Agreement shall be terminated and the Authority shall have no further responsibility for the acceptance, transportation, nor treatment of the wastewater being diverted to the Authority's Big Bear Creek Interceptor pipeline as provided herein. ARTICLE VI That Section 8.03, INDEMNITY, which reads as follows: Section 8.03. INDEMNITY ... wil Haffilm WE be OMITTED and DELETED in its entirety, and the following be substituted in its place: From and after November 30, 1998, liability for damages arising from the reception, transportation, delivery and disposal of all wastewater generated within the Big Bear Creek Basin of the City shall remain in the City and the 51 -11 City agrees to save and hold the Authority harmless from all claims, demands and causes of action which may be asserted by anyone on account of the reception, transportation, delivery and disposal of all wastewater generated within the Big Bear Creek Basin of the City. ARTICLE VI This FIRST AMENDMENT, to the extent of any conflict with the original AGREEMENT shall supersede the terms and provisions of the original AGREEMENT. However, it is the express intention of AUTHORITY and City that this FIRST AMENDMENT and the original AGREEMENT shall be completely integrated and be construed in harmony and congruity as a single instrument. EXECUTED on the day of 1996, which shall be the effective date of the FIRST AMENDMENT to the AGREEMENT. ATTEST: JAMES L. MURPHY ,Secretary Board of Directors (SEAL) ATTEST: (SEAL) TRINITY RIVER AUTHORITY OF TEXAS DANNY F. VANCE, General Manager CITY OF SOUTHLAKE HE HONORABLE RICK STACY, MAYOR City of Southlake, Texas STAFF REPORT October 11, 1996 CASE NO: ZA 96-115 PROJECT: Ordinance No. 480-218 - Second Reading Rezoning / The Woods Addition STAFF CONTACT: Karen Gandy, Zoning Administrator 481-5581, ext. 743 Dennis Killough, Planner I 481-5581, ext. 787 REQUESTED ACTION: Rezoning of approximately 17.082 acres situated in the J. J. Freshour Survey, Abstract No. 521, Tract 1 LOCATION: Southeast comer of the intersection of Florence Road and Pearson Lane OWNER: V.T. Cross APPLICANT: Bryant Real Estate, Inc. CURRENT ZONING: "AG" Agricultural District REQUESTED ZONING: "SF -IA" Single Family Residential District LAND USE CATEGORY: Medium Density Residential (may include limited low intensity office and/or retail uses) NO. NOTICES SENT: Fourteen (14) RESPONSES: One (1) notification was received within the 200' notification area: Wanda Stutsmans, 2112 Cummberland Trail, Southlake, in favor. P&Z ACTION: September 19, 1996; Approved (7-0) rezoning for The Woods Addition CITY COUNCIL ACTION: October 1, 1996; Approved (7-0), First Reading, Ordinance 480-218 for the Rezoning of The Woods Addition. STAFF COMMENTS: Please note that a change of zoning to the "SF -IA" Single Family Residential District does not require a Concept Plan Review by Staff. L:\WP-FILES\MEMO\96CASES\96-115Z.WPD 7A-1 WMERU 7A-2 m9mirig 77 Q � lL Q U LL Q U lL Q lL Q OOmOp00mmcom- �6 mm mQ mQ mQ mQ O O!6n 0 0 0 0 0 0 ai c ¢ Q Q Q LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL :;E;E;E;E f_A�tAU)U)w(ANfnfn I T"NM46tDh060e- m mti •• may„ —�/� N M `' r lD CC Q CC Q CL Q I - C W x = E E O C p m v m I2))�xgc0:gx2cm9a (xim � �I t�0001eO-reN-r.4 seti-e~-e06-eO- I 3380A HOSONIM Q m cu m Q to to _ dl ` iSIA r Q to n cr cn Cl) m c cc w m IL LU W 5 w Y O Zz ¢ oz Q °' o � I I Z N�cq a o W on, ,8 W � CU Z� � C H a az o _ > 0 N - • U Q cri , C�, CNJ 7777 rPT -i cs U . U .- U �-L! U u a Li- a m a LL- a m m Q cc CL • Q T Q F- F- t- - N ,- C.0 tL m a CL Q cc Q L'7 m a /m i M rT , 41 u Q ~ Lo ` o p r i Z Q J Q w m (0 E :D T U T 00 CG c r— lIWI� AlI� Q Q Q 7A-3 3113N JO Allo LO U a. lD Q r-� t�-� Ln lD cc:m 1 V, Q m I r----; r-, r 31 + ML 1S3LOi j I _ kOSONIM— araa. aNu. _ o it =E � � Y R V 9 y p ♦ W � _ I: 'N � -nV81 V1SIA O c g n y z Waro• s.,t{a.e{ I w •' & • ?i . Y g I �I o Z I I i g III $A j_ rax 3NV1"-NOSLV AUM aM.{ _ x .t .. �__ r: as :t _ h a � 2 7A-4 CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS ORDINANCE NO. 480-218 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 APPROXIMATELY 17.082 ACRES SITUATED IN THE JOHN J. FRESHOUR SURVEY, ABSTRACT NO.521, BEING TRACT 1, AND MORE FULLY AND COMPLETELY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT "A" FROM "AG" AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT TO "SF - IA" 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. 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 "AG" Agricultural District under the City's Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance; and . IWHEREAS, 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 L:\CTYDOCS\ORD\CASES\480-218.SFI Page 1 7A-5 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: Being approximately 17.082 acres situated in the John J. Freshour Survey, Abstract No. 521, Tract 1, and more fully and completely described in Exhibit "A" attached L:\CTYDOCS\ORD\CASES\480-218.SFI Page 2 7A-6 (awl hereto and incorporated herein, from "AG" Agricultural District to "SF -IA" 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 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. L:\CTYDOCS\ORD\CASES\480-218.SF1 7A-7 Page 3 A 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 Ist reading the day of , 1996. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY PASSED AND APPROVED on the 2nd reading the day of 1996. L: \CTYDOCS\ORD\CASES\480-218. SF 1 Page 4 7A-8 MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: CITY ATTORNEY DATE: ADOPTED: EFFECTIVE: L:\CTYDOCS\ORD\CASES\480-218.SF1 %A-9 Page 5 A EXHIBIT "A" BEGINNING at the Northwest corner of the herein described tract, said point being at'the intersection of the South line of Florence Road and the East line of Pearson Lane, said point being, by deed calls in the above referenced deed,.22.4 South and 21.7 feet East of the occupied Northwest corner of said Freshour Survey, and from which said point a 5/8" iron at the Southwest corner of Vista ..Trails Country Estates Addition to the City of Keller, as shown on a plat of record in Volume 388-98,_,Page 16, Plat Records, Tarrant County, Texas, bears N. 150 - 53' - 36" E. 51.14 feet; THENCE N. 890 - 32' - 00" E. along the South line of said Florence Road 1543.80 feet to a I" iron found in same at the Northwest corner of -a-tract described --in a- deed to Buddy J. Sutton of -record- in Volume 5516, Page 328, Deed Records, Tarrant County, Texas; 4WO4CE S. 00 - 24' - 04" E. 486.05 feet along the West line of the last referenced tract to a V1 pipe found in same at the Northeast corner of Vista Trail Addition to the City of Southlake, as shown on a plat of record in Volume 388-95, Page 3, Deed Records, .Tarrant County, Texas; THENCE S. 890 - 53' - 30" W. 856.50 feet along the North line of said Addition to a V iron found at t-he- No.rthwes•t corner of same, said point being the •Northeast corner 'of tot 1 of J. J. Freshour No. 521 Addition .to the City of Southlake as shown•.on a plat of record in Cabinet A, Slide 1825, Plat.Records, Tarrant County, Texas; THENCE S. 890 - 47' - 01" W. along the North line of said Lot 1 and -continuing 690.50 feet to the Southwest corner of the 'herein described tract in the East line of Pearson Lane; THENCE N. 00 — O1' - 08" W. 477.67 feet along said East line to the POINT OF BEGINNING and containing 17.082 acres. M L:\CTYDOCS\ORD\CASES\480-218.SFI Page 6 7A-10 City of Southlake, Texas STAFF REPORT October 11, 1996 CASE NO: ZA 96-116 PROJECT: Preliminary Plat / Lots 1-8, Block 1, The Woods Addition STAFF CONTACT: Karen Gandy, Zoning Administrator 481-5581, ext. 743 Dennis Killough, Planner I 481-5581, ext. 787 REQUESTED ACTION: Preliminary Plat of approximately 17.082 acres containing 8 residential lots situated in the J. J. Freshour Survey, Abstract No. 521, Tract 1 LOCATION: Southeast corner of the intersection of Florence Road and Pearson Lane OWNER: V.T. Cross APPLICANT: Bryant Real Estate, Inc. CURRENT ZONING: "AG" Agricultural District REQUESTED ZONING: "SF -IA" Single Family Residential District LAND USE CATEGORY: Medium Density Residential (may include limited low intensity office and/or retail uses) NO. NOTICES SENT: Fourteen (14) RESPONSES: One (1) response was received within the 200' notification area: Wanda Stutsman, 2112 Cummberland Trail, Southlake, in favor. P & Z ACTION: September 19, 1996; Approved (7-0) applicants request to table until the October 3, 1996 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting. October 3, 1996; Approved (6-0), subject to Plat Review Summary No. 2 dated September 27, 1996, changing 5' utility easement on east to 10' drainage and utility easement; Applicant to grade southeast portion of site using terracing technique to slow drainage run-off. STAFF COMMENTS: The applicant has met all items in Plat Review Summary No. 1 dated August 30, 1996 and Plat Review Summary No. 2 dated September 27, 1996 with the exception of those items in the attached Plat Review Summary No. 3 dated October 11, 1996. L:\WP-FILES\MEMO\96CASES\96-116PP.WPD 7B-1 ERNEST HEDGCOTH Consulting Engineers, Inc. (AW September 23, 1996 PUNNING • QESIGN • ENGINEERING Dennis Killough City of Southlake 667 N. Carroll Southlake, Texas 76092 Ref ZA 96-116 Preliminary Plat J.J. Freshour Survey, Abst. No. 521 Dear Mr. Killough, I have reviewed the comments for the above Preliminary Plat concerning the drainage for the site. This subdivision contains large one and half to two and half acre lots which are heavily wooded. Approximately 11.6 acres of the site drains to the southeast corner into an existing drainage easement. The runoff coefficient "0.5" was used for the drainage study. This is for the standard lot size subdivision. The actual conditions for this large lot would be "0.3" which would reduce the runoff by sixty seven percent or Q5=19.1 cfs, Q100=33.4 cis. The proposed drainage from this subdivision will follow the natural drainage toward the southeast corner and will not adversely impact the surrounding property. 1f you y have any questions please contact me at 831-7711. Sincerely .1 - M & A Ernest Hedgcoth, P.E. REC'D SEP 2 31996 9693_drn Q., 5701-C Midway Road Fort Worth, Texas 76117 817-831-7711 7B-2 cl L JIMHOUA31 !41qNl. IN j ---------- ............. ------ ------------ act N. ---------- C4 un----- - it E3 34; 00 7M. Z 7 VH - ------ 1! 7M 6'W-4 Q 0 r4r CLto# I T R, gag if i A-0 j iB Z-0 NOS, V3d Ell 7B-3 110 m boo m m m m m m m Q 0 0 C 0 00 0 0 0 0 LL LL N IL LNL LL WE W LL W Or- NMetuitCh 06 e- (14 eh .t uA to ti 00 a) V- - e- r e- e- e- " -4 o u-- -� a a U U U � � LL a ti a LL m m m N m m m v v v aC cr Q Q F- F- i-- F- F- F- - __ m _-__-_-__- m t, .,... _ .. r N LO t... y LL v • TM Q Q f- • T� .Y Q I-- • t= Q F - N c c W L d m C 10 OD O O x c �c`tnNEEELcocis �c�°' i�v�m° aci=��ci N)U 7QLd6ci VGWLLV () !' N M 00 Oil T" . ...... r r I 3380A BOSONIM c cn N -' II m v to to n di V1SIA r U ! a i I I tt cn to r`to n 1— s to � a w W ♦/n�*� w a Y Z V j Q to LL to -- O4 Q N Z N� o m o �l r' Wt- C� Z Q Q Ln U Q cPT C— U U t1 U W-. U m .Q m Q ¢ L mQ cc cc v v CO r, LL m a Qv ttv Qv I r. r tv ¢ i F- Lo i o 0 r Z Q J Q w m CD � � T n U Q 00 . =r lIWI-i AiIO - LO a �=• L` 7B-4 d3113JIJOJIlIJ tz m C n ¢ cn City of Southiake, Texas No: ZA 96-116 Review No: Three Date of Review:10111/96 =77INWIM17, "T SURVEYOR: CITY STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE ABOVE REFERENCED PROJECT RECEIVED BY THE CITY ON 10/07/96 AND WE OFFER THE FOLLOWINd STIPULATIONS. THESE STIPULATIONS ARE HEREBY MADE CONDITIONS OF PLAT APPROVAL UNLESS SPECIFICALLY AMENDED BY THE CITY COUNCIL. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ORNEED FURTHER CLARIFICATION, PLEASE CONTACT DENNIS KILLOUGH AT (817) 481.5581, EXT. 787. Provide easements in accordance with the water, sewer and drainage plans as approved by Public Works. A ZACTIOM September 19, 1996; Approved (7-0) applicants request to table until the October 3, 1996 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting. October 3, 1996; Approved (6-0), subject to Plat Review Summary No. 2 dated September 27, 1996, changing 5' utility easement on east to 10' drainage and utility easement; Applicant to grade southeast portion of site using terracing technique to slow drainage run-off. * Denotes Informational Comment cc: Bryant Real Estate, Inc. Ward Surveying Company V.T. Cross, 50 Willow Bend Street, Gary, Texas 75643 L %WP-F[I.FMV19 W&I 16PP.3 7B-5 rl Ut 'a:it-" all.s? F iii «3.sies I Y �• • y V ) 77ftb1 r'�151A.35 �' •. •f •{ ft t M i I • r M { •!! i14rTibfyri n� �r �wwrrsu.r rc 7B-6 -- City of Southlake, Texas STAFF REPORT October 11, 1996 CASE NO: ZA 96-113 PROJECT: Site Plan - First American Savings Banc STAFF CONTACT: Karen Gandy, Zoning Administrator 481-5581, ext. 743 Dennis Killough, Planner I 481-5581, ext. 787 REQUESTED ACTION: Site Plan for proposed Lot 4, Block 1, First American Savings Banc Addition, being legally described as approximately 1.043 acres situated in the Littleberry G. Hall Survey, Abstract No. 686, and being a portion of Tract 1C3. LOCATION: North side of W. Southlake Blvd. (FM 1709), approximately 750' west of the intersection of N. White Chapel Blvd. and W. Southlake Blvd. (FM 1709) OWNER: First American Savings Banc, S.S.B., Shareholder's Trust APPLICANT: Terry Wilkenson CURRENT ZONING: "SP-2" Generalized Site Plan District LAND USE CATEGORY: Mixed Use (may include offices buildings, hotels, and commercial and retail centers that serve local and regional needs) NO. NOTICES SENT: Four (4) RESPONSES: None P & Z ACTION: September 5, 1996; Approved (7-0) to table and continue Public Hearing until September 19, 1996 due to Case Limitation Resolution No. 95-24. September 19, 1996; Approved (6-1), subject to Staff Review Summary No. 2 dated September 13, 1996 amending Item #1 from a required 60' R.O.W. and 60' radius cul-de-sac to a 50' right of way and 50' radius cul-de-sac; amending Item #3A to eliminate two (2) southwest corner parking spaces and amending Item #3B to eliminate three (3) southeast corner parking spaces in order to provide more driveway throat depth and amending Item #3B to read "Lots 4 and 5"; deleting Item #4 (lot lines 7C-1 City of Southlake, Texas should be radial to cul-de-sac); amending Item #6A to omit the bufferyard between Lots 4 and 5 and place the required plantings elsewhere on the property. CITY COUNCIL ACTION: October 1, 1996; Approved applicant's request to table and continue the Public Hearing to October 15, 1996. STAFF COMMENTS: The applicant has met all items in Staff Review Summary No. 1 dated August 30, 1996 and Staff Review Summary No. 2 date September 13, 1996 with the exception of those items in the attached Staff Review Summary No. 3 dated September 27,1996. L:\WP-FILES\MEMO\96CASES\96-113SP.WPD 7C-2 09/24/1996 15:40 4463116 GOODWIN MARSHALL PAGE 03 RED SEP 2 41996 Case No. 2A 96-113 First American Savings Banc Addition Lots 4, Block 1 Requested Variances from C-3 General Commercial District Requirements C-3 District Requirement 5' Type Buffetyard on the common lot line between Lots 4&5. 60' street right-of-way with a 60' radius on the cul-de-sac. Requested Variance No Bufferyard on the common lot lone between Lots 4 & 5 but providing the required plantings elsewhere on the site. 50' street right-of-way with a 50' radius on the cul-de-sac. The following uses shall not be allowed- 1- Frozen food locker 2. Bowling alley 3. Conventional Golf Course 4. Lodges, sororities and/or fraternities 5. Medical Care Facilities 6. Mortuaries, funeral homes and undertakers 7. Skating rinks, ice and roller 8. Taverns, clubs and other comparable establishments under which the on -premises consumption of alcoholic beverages is permitted. 7C-3 8 ' 8B BA3 A A 882A a MA 5 Ac 11 BA2 A15 8A9 8A amc so BAI 90 9A 8BI8 10 L 3A JA2 24.91 Ac L" k OV n9 1; i i ; : 14 W.W. HALL 24- k 3 I A A W_W brrio N A A-4 IIA2A IA 911. IIA2 9E r pLjt4 aj 3A XIA %EV A -on 3CI PARK 1 v i 3E 3BI 3B2 3818 394 ow5NS 303 25 Ac ,APorrlo .4 22 k Jae 34A 7.6( X2 3c 5F W, MA 5E 50 SD 502 5c 3A 3AI V EL 10 Ac 6 Akc 50,1 oDro Ac .57 G & JAc Ac 156 A, %cy 15 Ac ALH 3DI X 13 3r 2MAJ u Al 2*2 2A5 JD 3D2 tj 4M Ac 2A.3 z 3H 3 28 IF 281 21 Act.. (-7 IGI 5 Ac 41 2B OSEDI N W' SLOWY A BMW'kL)N &5 Ac 2C =A 2cl — — — — — — ?Q71 Ac 4 Ac 6 Ac fO Ac 5c 4 A, 5a y IA To TRACT MAP C, r -4 (j) - LU W(W. 0 z za 0 Z 0 z LU N C. 0 CL C0 A 1 l A ri 0) 0) C\l Lu (A < _j N Z LA.J x <Uo CD Z < E; F— U) C)l 0 001 �i :04 C'. N h r cr, ell) Ln r CIO �,`� �'� 04 cr cts 0 a I 0 C. out C-A IOU L) < f1p OLC Z.4 I C/) CO Cl < W C\j cn-) CIO =3 7C-5 C) ct It 91 l City of Southlake, Texas No: ZA 96-113 Review No: Three Date of Review: 9/27/96 1. • "M .I 1 11 <. F 1 t • iM•' . 1 • • • y ! • '1T1' • i • CITY' STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE ABOVE REFERENCED PROJECT RECEIVED BY THE CITY ON 9/23/96 AND WE OFFER THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS. THESE STIPULATIONS ARE HEREBY MADE CONDITIONS OF SITE PLAN APPROVAL UNLESS SPECIFICALLY AMENDED BY THE CITY. COUNCIL. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR NEED FURTHER CLARIFICATION, PLEASE CONTACT DENNIS KILLOUGH AT (817) 481-5581, EXT. 7.87. 1. Change the street ROW to 60' in width and provide a 60' radius on the bobble. (P&ZAction 9119196. allow a 50' R.O. W. and 50' radius bubble) 2. Show, label, and dimension all fire lines. Include all curb radii dimensions adjacent to the fire lane. All fire lanes must be per the Fire Department requirements. Provide the required throat depths for traffic stacking. The following throat depths are required: A. Driveway into Lot 3 - minimum 50' req'd. Provided 15't. (P&ZAction 9119196. remove 2 southwest parking spaces to increase depth. The applicant has complied) B. Driveway into Lots 4 & 5 - minimum 50' req'd. Provided 15'f: (P&ZAction 9119196. remove 3 southeast parking spaces to increase depth. The applicant has complied) . 4. Proposed lot lines should be revised to be radial from the cul-de-sac. (P&ZAction 9119196. delete) 5. A 5' Type `A' bufferyard is required along the east property line. The applicant has requested a waiver of this bufferyard as shown on Sheet 2 of this plan. (P&ZAction 9119196. allow the omission of the required bufferyard and place the required plantings elsewhere on the property) 6. Correct the =Q parking shown in the Site Data Summary to reflect 44 parking spaces. Please note the applicant has provided 46 parking spaces on the site. 7. If any, show the location, orientation, type and height of intended lighting, signs, and exterior auditory. City of Southlake, Texas * No review of proposed signs is intended with this site plan. A separate building permit is required prior to construction of any signs. * A letter of permission from the adjacent property owner(s) on the west must be obtained prior to issuance of a building permit for the construction of the off -site pavement and a permit -from TXDOT must be obtained prior to any curb cut along F.M. 1709. The proposed street must be . constructed prior to beginning construction on this site. The applicant should be aware .that prior to issuance of a building permit, a final plat must be processed through the City and filed in the County Plat Records, a fully corrected 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. * This review is based on the "C-3" Zoning District Regulations. P & Z ACTION: September 5, 1996; Approved (7-0) to table and continue Public Hearing until September 19, 1996 due to Case Limitation Resolution No. 95-24. September 19, 1996; Approved (6-1), subject to Staff Review.Summary No. 2 dated September 13, 1996 amending Item #1 from a required 60' R.O.W. and 60' radius cul-de-sac to a 50' right of way and 50' radius cul-de-sac; amending Item #3A to eliminate two (2) southwest corner parking spaces and amending Item #.3B to eliminate three (3) southeast comer parking spaces in order to provide more driveway throat depth and amending Item #3R to read "Lots 4 and 5"; deleting Item #4 (lot lines should be radial to cul-de-sac); amending Item. #6A to omit the bufferyard between Lots 4 and 5 and place the required plantings elsewhere on the property. * Denotes Informational Comment cc: Terry Wilkinson Goodwin & Marshall LAWP-FILES\REV\96\96-113SP.3 7C-7 q ■■rrr ls��rurru; i rr■■■■r,. f!J�i�li�lipi i @aa�aaaaw _ _..�... - - - - - 7C-8 l ic V co 1 Le nj i 3 '$ ��s �4 !`WE )Y I IL a;- i ij IL 4 I a 3 7 ems; ao-Es,�me-ts • � t . P l 7C—n f � CID CQ a. jg118 .J d `1 1 9 � 6 A • a /III i \ IY11.II TiFv' '` -------------- 7C-10 City of Southlake, Texas STAFF REPORT October 11, 1996 CASE NO: ZA 96-114 PROJECT: Preliminary Plat - First American Savings Banc STAFF CONTACT: Karen Gandy, Zoning Administrator 481-5581, ext. 743 Dennis Killough, Planner I 481-5581, ext. 787 REQUESTED ACTION: Preliminary Plat for the proposed Lots 2, 3, 4, and 5, Block 1, First American Savings Banc Addition, being legally described as approximately 3.83 acres situated in the Littleberry G. Hall Survey, Abstract No. 686, and being a portion of Tract 1C3. LOCATION: North side of W. Southlake Blvd. (FM 1709), approximately 750' west of the intersection of N. White Chapel Blvd. and W. Southlake Blvd. (FM 1709) OWNER: First American Savings Banc, S.S.B., Shareholder's Trust APPLICANT: Terry Wilkenson CURRENT ZONING: "SP-2" Generalized Site Plan District LAND USE CATEGORY: Mixed Use (may include office buildings, hotels, and commercial and retail centers that serve local and regional needs) CORRIDOR RECOMMENDATION: Retail Commercial (same as in CS, 0-1, C-1, C-2, C-3, and B-1 district) NO. NOTICES SENT: Six (6) RESPONSES: None P & Z ACTION: September 5, 1996; Approved (7-0) applicant's request to table until the September 19, 1996 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting due to the continuation of Case ZA96-112 and Case ZA96-113. September 19, 1996; Approved (6-1), subject to Staff Review Summary No. 2 dated September 13, 1996 amending Item #3 from a required 60' R.O.W. and 60' radius cul-de-sac to a 50' 7D-1 City of Southlake, Texas right of way and 50' radius cul-de-sac; amending Item #41) to read "...if any" at the end of the sentence; deleting Item #5 (lot lines should be radial to cul-de-sac); modifying Item #6 changing the required setback on Lot 2 adjacent to Keystone Court from a 30' BL to a 25' BL. CITY COUNCIL ACTION: October 1, 1996; Approved applicant's request to table until the October 15, 1996 City Council meeting. STAFF COMMENTS: The applicant has met all items in Plat Review Summary No. 1 dated August 30, 1996 and Plat Review Summary No. 2 dated September 13, 1996 with the exception of those items in the attached Plat Review Summary No. 3 dated September 27, 1996. L:\WP-FILES\MEMO\96CASES\96-114PP.WPD 7D-2 A g A2 88. i 8A8 i A A 3 B 882A =A SA3 A me SA2 BA15 SA9 BA it BA1 9A sale 11f 10 110 ��0 A09 I i� 35 Ac 1 t 1 ilA2A to 9F m i 1 1 1 1 1 I i If I 111ran _� Q s0 s k >Itf.6A AC ! i + i 3A k 3A2 i HALL JfJoN W.W. !�7 b 1•�;' Ali i 1 1: � 1 1 1 1 1 1 r r �•It I .�Cl•/. _ imp WIN IL ag . I!_ � ',7 1 lA 1e iG --� Dp _. I x'�i �-- - .. AT � _ _ ' 7D-3 ;2 Q G —L N � E CL cz (-� cvj O t� �a � Vi o �q U U Q G Q Z"I _� CV m Q N - ILIO � M � d .-It 7D-4 Z >- - N J N Z W an-LjC5Z W � Q U O .,. ss¢seeaaeeaoee e, ;�B69E€99�9@E �96A&'9909�E I" Y %D-5 Z a m d 7 � N Ac RE W d ass 1 E _ L vim/, t vim/, t + J 1 I �M \ `1 iJ� TIA 1 „I�I 1 1� 1 I I i City of Southlake, Texas No: ZA 96-114 Review No: Three Date of Review: 9/27/'96 � • � t I I � l � i �:1 _ I 1 M �S �_ I � � ' �� - 1 � 1 1 � 1 1 ,1 �: i li (',;; J_ I J MMIPITWIT ITIT"Intt , CITY STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE ABOVE REFERENCED PROJECT RECEIVED BY THE CITY ON 923196 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 DENNIS KILLOUGH AT (817) 481-5581, EXT. 787. 1. Change the street ROW to 60' in width and provide a 60' radius on the bubble. (P&Z Action 9/19/96: allow a 50' R O. W. and 50' radius on the bubble) 2. The following changes are needed with regard to easements: A. Provide drainage and utility easements in accordance with the- drainage and utility plans as approved by the public works department. B. If any, show the location of the 100 year floodplains and floodways per developed conditions. Designate flooways as drainage easement. 3. Proposed lot lines should be revised to be radial from the cul-de-sac. (P&ZAction 9119196. delete) 4. Provide a 30 B.L. on lot 2 along Keystone Court. (P&Z Action 9/19/96. , allow 25' BL) P & Z ACTION: September 5, 1996; Approved (7-0) applicant's request to table until the September 19, 1996 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting due to the continuation of Case ZA96-112 and Case ZA96-113. cc: Terry Wilkinson Goodwin & Marshall .kAWP-FILESIREA%\%-114PP.3 September 19, 1996; Approved (6-1), subject to Staff Review Summary No. 2 dated September 13,1996 amending Item #3 from a required 60' R.O.W. and 60' radius cul-de-sac to a 50' right of way and 50' radius cul-de-sac; amending Item #4D to read "...if any" at the end of the sentence; deleting Item #5 (lot lines should be radial to cul-de-sac); modifying Item #6 changing the required setback on Lot 2 adjacent to Keystone Court from a 30' BL to a 25' BL. 7D-6 ' 1 I ItI�� si !� s� I V* ,!�i �` •fat � � - IT PillU '{ � 'pit I�IE� RAI 1; 1 p ���_ 1!±t i 7D-7 City of Southlake, Texas STAFF REPORT October 11, 1996 CASE NO: ZA 96-127 PROJECT: Site Plan / Lot 2 Block 1- First American Savings Banc Addition STAFF CONTACT: Karen P. Gandy, Zoning Administrator, 481-5581, Ext. 743 Dennis Killough, Planner I, 481-5581, Ext. 787 REQUESTED ACTION: Site Plan of the proposed Lot 2, Block 1, First American Savings Banc Addition, on property legally described as approximately 0.971 acres situated in the Littleberry G. Hall Survey, Abstract No. 686, and being a portion of Tract 1 C3 LOCATION: North side of West Southlake Boulevard, approximately 750' west of the intersection of White Chapel Boulevard and Southlake Blvd. (F.M. 1709) OWNER: First American Savings Banc, S.S.B., Shareholder's Trust APPLICANT: Terry Wilkinson CURRENT ZONING: "S-P-2" Generalized Site Plan District. LAND USE CATEGORY: Mixed Use (may include office buildings, hotels, and commercial and retail centers that serve local and regional needs) CORRIDOR RECOMMENDATION: Retail Commercial (same as in CS, 0-1, C-1, C-2, C-3 districts) NO. NOTICES SENT: Four (4) RESPONSES: None P&Z ACTION: October 3, 1996; Approved (6-0), subject to Staff Review Summary No. 1 dated September 27, 1996, deleting Items #2A (requiring 5' Type `A' bufferyard and plantings along the east property line, but to relocate the required plants elsewhere on the site, maximizing placement in the front yard), #3B (providing minimum requirements for driveway spacing along F.M.1709), #3C (providing minimum driveway throat depths for traffic stacking), and #16 (requiring horizontal and vertical articulation on the south, east, and west building facades; was approved as shown). STAFF COMMENTS: The applicant has met all items in Staff Review Summary No. 1 dated September 27,1996 with the exception of those items addressed in the attached Staff Review Summary No. 2 dated October 11, 1996. L:\WP-FELES\NIEMO\96CASES\96-127SP.WPD 7E-1 V 1 61 ' �F 2F I WA JYh y 2Ei �fP r i U 3Aze o ,.�A A--- 28 tom' i 70 J111 3C f z i N 382 ]e 197 M, JSSE A, 17Lj 60 2C1 BV—------------- V ;' i" jt,DD ky, /C2A /C2 .----"zc /C ]A 2A i i I p ��1� i ; zS�OG A[ ' —Ga an ac � �, ` --/ lE1B JE,A JE,C 3 Ac ; "9 A( 6.43 Ac t Ac �A 1__ ®T 1 AR i ; ec2�� I _.--- B ApDr(I � -�... +o, .ae /c3 SUl A- �. FEST W 7., L 181 J :33 Ac tie 6 6A 6A11 BAN 58AA 6A8A1 6 g e81 ,Et 1 tF 102 1ASM — HE 6 A (, A 2 dui a enA i " 19Lgo 01i 1a9 s Gf- uz 6AIS aeic A k 9A —c" 11 8A1 1 ttF 90 to t TIL' i ; 2 9t k p�Y i �_� HALL Dp�1oN W.W. HALL 1 1 i i i 35 Ac ttAU 1A • . 1 X 3A u AL i 1 �� ! ., 1 1 3E ]F 1 t ] � PAW JB1A R1fY A-61li 18 - ss Ac ]38 22 Ac � 383 I I ] { ; � f 7i65 Ac 38 3C �// MA 1 M x g SE SD 582 r 'i A 2 ]Ct I 5C ]A 1A 3A1 ]C 38 1 � I 391 T ■dH 1� P 10 Ac 6 Ac 1k 37 G 3 k f82k LW At ll / i o^ L ✓ vl ]D, M R P i i m 3D2 sn SC 3< UtC U 10 W 2AS 2A3 2 All Dllt� 4M Ac We ?' 3H 3H x 0 1AT E PST 1, .. c cw.i T ' 2e =� r � � z, A: X �. wr +.�- 5 AcWHRE , ,c OVA 4._ surer+ A-3fJ IGI ' ` � i 2c rl 2C2A, - 2C,r - . sa71 Ac . ..` L✓ `, , N 8� t 1 1 I 1 1 HQI711 AIN'U ��W� Wl A-Sa TRACT MAP 7E-2 _r �. 11 7.31 AC . E 1 I ' TR 1C1 I 1.0 AC 1R I TR 1C2 9 I ' 6.0 AC I 2 • 1 � DIA ALL G � B 686 3 L No nN 8 TR 1 B ADv I 4 = 9.9 AC First American M ISavings Banc 2 C2 S P-2 7.57 ® I R I _it I 5 A W. Justus AwC I S,IVINj p QA1V4 I i 1BZS. ? 1 TR 5. • .. 100 -il 9 9 1 B TR 3.83C� • 1 �J82 1 TR 1 C4 s5 O 1 o'R UTHLp►KE BLVD • -- - -- -- -- -- SU o 1.0 AC TR t, w to TR.3C2 i 01 10 .W Ac ' 33 State of Texas / G. Lechler TR.3C L-889LO 01 13.11 Ac 8 � in gy, GM AD N, 4 ,�96A i f ADJACENT OWNERS TR 3M AND ZONING 1.0 AC TR 3D1 1.0 AC SPIN REPRESENTATIVE #10 AL MORIN 7E-3 TO ="l a-1 City of Southlake, Texas No: ZA 96-127 Review No: 3�ff4 Date of Review: 10/11/96 CITY STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE ABOVE REFERENCED PROJECT RECEIVED BY THE CITY ON 10/07/96 AND WE OFFER THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS. THESE STIPULATIONS ARE HEREBY MADE CONDITIONS OF SITE PLAN APPROVAL UNLESS SPECIFICALLY AMENDED BY THE CITY COUNCIL. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR NEED FURTHER CLARIFICATION, PLEASE CONTACT DENNIS KILLOUGH AT (817) 481-5581, EXT. 787. ---------------------------- 1. Provide the required 5' Type `A' bufferywd and plantings along the east property line. (P & ZACTION 10103196. delete, relocate the required plants elsewhere on the site, maximizing placement in the front yard) The following changes are needed with regard to proposed driveways and compliance with the Driveway Ordinance No. 634: A. A minimum driveway spacing of 500' is required between the proposed full access driveway centerline and the existing driveway centerline to the east. The spacing provided is approximately 26T. (P & ZACTION 10103196. delete) B. Provide minimum driveway throat depths for traffic stacking. The minimum throat depth required is 38'. The applicant has provide approximately 35' of depth. (P & ZACTION 10103196. delete) 3. Show, label, and dimension all fire lines. Include all curb radii dimensions adjacent to the fire lane. Fire lanes must meet City Fire Department requirements. 4. A revised concept plan is required on the property directly north of this site. Staff did not require submittal of the revised concept plan due to a pending land exchange with the City. If the property north of this site is not acquired by the City, a revised concept plan must be processed and the property must have street frontage prior to any further development of the site. 5. Horizontal and vertical articulation is;required on the southeast, and west building facades meeting the requirements of Ord.480 Section 43.9.c.l.c. Compliance with the articulation requirements are as shown in the attached Articulation Evaluation Chart. (P & ZACTION 10103196. delete, approved as shown) 7E-4 City of Southlake, Texas P&ZACTION October 3,1996; Approved (6-0), subject to Staff Review Summary No. 1 dated September 27, 1996, deleting Items #2A (requiring 5' Type `A' bufferyard and plantings along the east property line, but to relocate the required plants elsewhere on the site, maximizing placement in the front yard), #3B (providing minimum requirements for driveway spacing along F.M. 1709), #3C (providing minimum driveway throat depths for traffic stacking), and #16 (requiring horizontal and vertical articulation on the south, east, and west building facades; was approved as shown). * No review of proposed signs is intended with this site plan. A separate building permit is required prior to construction of any signs. A permit from TxDOT must be obtained prior to any curb cut along F.M. 1709. The proposed street must be constructed prior to beginning construction on this site. The applicant should be aware that prior to issuance of a building permit, a final plat must be processed through the City and filed in the County Plat Records, a fully corrected 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. * This review is based on the "C-3" Zoning District Regulations. Denotes Informational Comment att: Articulation Evaluation Chart: ' cc: Teary Wilkinson Ooodwin & Marshall LAWP- 127SP.2 7E-5 Articulation Evaluation No. 2 Case No. ZA %427 Date of Evaluation: 10/11/96 nfor Two Story Office Bldg., Lot 2, Block 1 First American Savings Banc Addition Received 10/09/96 Cnatios t -facing: South Wall ht. = 22 Horizontal articulation Vertical articulation Required Provided Delta Okay? Required Provided Delta Okay? Max. wall length 66 32 52°/a Yes 66 35 47% Yes Min. artic. offset 3 10 233% Yes 3 3 0% Yes Min. artic. length 8 24 200% Yes 9 8 11 % No R. Side - facing: Max. wall length Min. artic. offset Min. artic. length L. Side - facing Max. wall length Min. artic. offset Min. artier length Rear - facing: C 14 East Wall ht. = 22 Horizontal articulation Required Provided Delta 66 52 21% 3 56 1767% 13 20 54% West Wall ht. = 22 Horizontal articulation Required Provided Delta 66 52 21% 3 56 1767% 13 20 54% Vertical articulation Okay? Required Provided Yes 66 26 Yes 3 2 Yes 6 6 Vertical articulation Okay? Required Provided Yes 66 26 Yes 3 2 Yes 6 6 North Wall ht. = 22 Articulation not required, facade is not visible from F.M. 1709 7E-6 Delta 61% 33% 0% Delta 61% 33% 0% Okay? Yes No Yes Okay? Yes No Yes 14 I i - 7E-7 MIR Z�W s �yy aD � s II ,E_g C iCx• ' � a f R HIS . W 42 f0p'p1 1p • am Ml 1w7 qbwdiwoo �w .oar r� 7E-9 SVXU Mftl H1fM 'DNW"Mm "o J:21015-OZ to # r < 9II0-M-ill. Im " V" Cd SM . 0" Mq ION. 1 q/ ►yy 7E-10 GYX-AL 3NPd1 RLnos 9NIMI a 221dd0,kaols-otiu Co O'> Or) L- O C.7 O I City of Southlake, Texas STAFF REPORT October 11, 1996 CASE NO: ZA 96-128 PROJECT: Revised Preliminary Plat / Lots 2 & 3, Block 1, First American Savings Banc Addition STAFF CONTACT: Karen Gandy, Zoning Administrator 481-5581, ext. 743 Dennis Killoug% Planner I 481-5581, ext. 787 REQUESTED ACTION: Revised Preliminary Plat for Lots 2 and 3, Block 1, First American Savings Banc Addition, being approximately 3.83 acres in the Littleberry G. Hall Survey, Abstract No. 686, and being a portion of Tract 1 C3, as recorded in Volume 10641, Page 1628 D.R.T.C.T. The plat proposes two commercial lots. LOCATION: North side of West Southlake Boulevard (F.M. 1709), approximately 750' west of the intersection of White Chapel Boulevard and Southlake Boulevard (F.M. 1709) OWNER: First American Savings Banc, S.S.B., Shareholder's Trust APPLICANT: Terry Wilkinson CURRENT ZONING: "S-P-2" Generalized Site Plan District LAND USE CATEGORY: Mixed Use (may include office buildings, hotels, and commercial and retail centers that serve local and regional needs CORRIDOR RECOMMENDATION: Retail Commercial (same as in CS, 0-1, C-1, C-2, C-3, and B-1 districts) NO. NOTICES SENT: Six (6) RESPONSES: None P&Z ACTION: October 3, 1996; Approved (6-0), subject to Plat Review Summary No. 1 dated September 27, 1996. STAFF COMMENTS: The applicant has met all items in Plat Review Summary No. 1 dated September 27, 1996 with the exception of those items in the attached Plat Review Summary No. 2 dated October 11, 1996. L:\WP-FILES\MEMO\96CASES\96-128PP.WPD 7F-1 • 2F y ' 13A2A �'(v 2E1 2E 'fP i y i U 3A28 3A2 NU. _ •: ... Ai 28 i A i 30 ,i4� NQ 382 `38'` 361 X58 Ac SJ p ly TC2 _._._. �F$r s.97 Ac •-' -SUR ----- y 1 j�D�N' Akw ; ' I' ICI . 4C2A 4C2-TCl 4C 2A ;' - ' - p K ' ; 25,406 Ac .G E BFt Bc \ 8D 8D 1 8C 8C1 .f }E1B 3EIA 3E1C B,LL f ST 5 Ac '� Ac Ac 6.43 4 AC Co E p 4Ct Mai M�---• ''•I 'A 6R1G Qll® ® ' nh 2 U 8C2-•----- ADD i .�, 4D 4C20 4C3 AR N i ', 35 Ac SU4'IEY A- '�. NEsr w SIREET Opt _ Sr El 1 IF 182 IA -- 5.53 k It8 A =. BA BAI1 8A16 8A BABAI m B 8 BB4 i AA 4 B 3 O, r'!NV'13 1 5 k GE i. f.�._••f \1k A A 882A C 8A2 BA15 .,.1tx64 k9ABA111F • 1'-f"1'f"71i1" I no� t �• ! p1Y p��� HALL ADpIf1O14 W.W. Inll�Ll� p,0 ! 1 l i l 1 j t1A 9E 11 1 I 'T-T•.t ' 7& ; 0 Ly _.� - WA µ PAW i i i i i i I A i i i i i i i i i i i i j t 381A I i 381 - -- )�, i i i f•-- - 25 Ac. 22 Ac Ow03A 3B2 m a 705 At �l0 783 s / 3 3D2 �m 1 i 397A 1 1 Kw M 3C 3D 1 i i 1 3F1 3C 5F SE 50 ^ 5DI 5112 _ SC 3A 3A1 3C 38 2 N •� -i^- '' 3t _ P E� k 6 k 50SI v, 3 Ac .57 1 G A, 7 Ac Ac 3.56 A,i .. ODD 10 P 30, T �Q - ' •-�"•-' _— l._ I \ 1 3F 2AIC 2AI m 2A2 TA5 '•. 2A3 2 --f — I..AKE OR 4.23 Ac' xA18 le 3 ixll 1- _ 3H t., 28 36 TPIT P► ..� COUIIr EA r21 Ac .. IF �-, 281 ; I i, it •;;, 70 263A - g -MY �%� 7•. ; IGI 5 Ac 4 .IINI' E 4 Ac aUA . o ..� r� _____ ;\ 5071 Ac ZC 21-ai 2C2A, 2C1K t4 Iv asr o.1� - = HORAN QRA� TRACT MAP 7F-2 , , 1 I ILFL.J I IN ME TR 1B ? 9.9 AC C2 W Justus 7.31 AC . TR 1 C3 3.g3 Ac CS City Of Southlake TR 1C1 1.0 AC ALL G � B 686 L Np N ADD C SP-2 Cross Sqare Lmtd. 1382} 3 4 'R - S. • .. O 11(� N0� l/'1, TR 1 B 9.9 AC TR 1 3. 9.3 151 1382� ,TR 1 C4 1 .65 O RS State °fi T exas i SOUTHIAn BLVD -- — -- -- -- —_ TR 1A 1.0 AC >: 548�2 IP SAD State G. Lechler 01 of Texas .889 O Q 1 / 3.11 Ac G g181�D�. No 4 1�964 ADJACENT OWNERS-- / AND ZONING TR 3M 1.0 AC TR 3D1 - — - - -------------- 1.0 AC SPIN REPRESENTATIVE #10 AL MORIN 717-3 TO III 1 �� ` City of Southiake, Texas PLAT /! No: 96-128 Review No: 3�nm Date of Review: 10/11/96 Project Name: PMUminsa Plat - Fint Amerimn Savings lbue Addiflon, Lots 2 & 3 Bl"k 1, 3.83 Acm out APPLICANT: SURVEYOR: Terry Wilkinson Qoodwin & Marshall 930 Parkview Lane 601 Bridge Street. Suite 100 Southlake, Texas 76093 Fort Worth Texas 76112 Phone: (81 ZL 3 -4�9,9. Phone: (817) 429-4373 Fax: (81 4 R_, Fax: (817) 446-3116 CITY STAFF HAS RED THE ABOVE REFERENCED PROJECT RECEIVED BY THE CITY ON iow196 AND WE OFFER THE FOLLOWING STtI'iMATIONS. 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,NAWAWAIMARMINMAVAMAwa PLEA$E'CONTACT DENNIS IMLOUGH AT 81 481-5581, EXT. 787. 1. Provide drainage and utility easements in accordance with the drainage and utility plans as approved by the public works department. 2. Proposed Lot 3 must have street frontage. "&ZACTION: October 3, 1996; Approved (6-0), subject to Plat Review Summary No. 1 dated September 27, 1996. cc: Terry W ill 7F-4 pit Jill lip. }� N ie� ! �• �#��;�'; �z �r � �i � €ens f 7F-5 City of Southlake, Texas STAFF REPORT October 11, 1996 CASE NO: ZA 96-121 PROJECT: Site Plan / Lot 2, Block 1- Southlake Center at Kimball STAFF CONTACT: Karen P. Gandy, Zoning Administrator, 481-5581, Ext. 743 Dennis Killough, Planner I, 481-5581, Ext. 787 REQUESTED ACTION: Site Plan for The Southlake Center at Kimball on property legally described as being approximately 1.7136 acres, being a portion of Lot 1, Block 1, Carrick Press Addition, situated in the Thomas Easter Survey, Abstract No. 474 and in the G. W. Main Survey, Abstract No. 1098, being a portion of Tract 2B. LOCATION: South side of the intersection of Bluebonnet Drive and East Southlake Boulevard (F.M. 1709) OWNER/APPLICANT: Southlake Kimball Venture Ltd. CURRENT ZONING: "C-3" General Commercial District LAND USE CATEGORY: Mixed Use (may include office buildings, hotels, and commercial and retail centers that serve local and regional needs) CORRIDOR RECOMMENDATION: NO. NOTICES SENT: RESPONSES: P & Z ACTION: Retail Commercial (same as in CS, 0-1, C-1, C-2, C-3 districts) Eight (8) One (1) was received from the 200' notification area: • Janice Miller, 165 S. Kimball Ave, Southlake, in favor. September 19, 1996; Approved (7-0) to table until October 3, 1996 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. October 3, 1996; Approved (4-2) subject to Staff Review Summary No. 2 dated September 27, 1996, deleting Item # 3A (requiring 75% of required total interior landscaping area be in the front and along the sides of the building). STAFF COMMENTS: The applicant has met all items in Staff Review Summary No. 1 dated September 13, 1996 and Staff Review Summary No. 2 dated September 27, 1996 with the exception of those items in the attached Staff Review Summary No. 3 dated October 11, 1996. LAWP-FILES\MEM0\96CASES\96-121 SP. WPD 7G-1 t - 5D28 8.75 At 5D3 i 5A2 5D4 50 SgG2 i WIA11 i% f A -IV - -- - - 'ti • '- 1 SqB Sp II ) I f j SA3A1 yj'1 �'' .-� r' I >B< 501 5l 58 511 SG SK ,� ''"''"' r. 4 ,�/� /p p1 C H®flUU/r�@�-17,�_lllll u k Hfi � sm 1 SB181 am / ,' �_• ' mAncr A I (� 5e4e ECI 281 2811 IBB Iln zet 2B6 Isj, u 2 PS -�,._ <_ _-- � A} 28 283 IB9` �n x .� � .... 713f0 -� Ci 1 211 2A I k 584E ? - R�1�r 2A N' k -4SA 582C � IA 58M se�A A I IB3 t8 182 1 NORT�WST PKWY ST x 3Ci B 2A1 N 364 38 RA oN relo `� F1E�,p ; i ; 21 1A3 — ``Y Y� 20 Ac RAr4DOW 51. A2A 2A 28 2CI mlw. : EASr SOtj Aloe mow. ADDt �� i `' — -----1— \ ALMN r{ACE — moon LAW lE5 qr �.� ! _ 2 28 102A 182 18 1 I i IBIS 15 Ac 20 2E A 3 3E x So 68 u 2A3A 2A3 IA2 YA2A it 3 2 21IA IB 381 6B1 i u k 2AIc I r IE I 2A3A 2A1 2 3AtD Ac IL. IIA IIB IIE — 13.6 Ac A-474 I 1 "— — 5 5A �� . 7 x_____ — I1D — — 1- _ 39 ---�.-.-•�T.- o 1103 � --•; — G M I�-_ - __� ur 6c 4A1 @1 I •--r t Y �; i ARK -- 4A4— slc 6KI I _- 1 1 IID5A1 m 1104 -- t i 1 383 3 Ac . 3• T 1 GRAPEwINE a7Y uwr TRACT MAP 7G-2 ADJACENT OWNERS - ._. AND ZONING o �� J I -I l7pin #T Representative B ' _ Peter SDot'rcar _ I v 3B �► z. 3B3 z i w 1 -3"3J-� B2 m „C_3" i inet Rd. Partners J. Parker I 1 �� I E2 _ I of T o- Oita I H. Bunchy I Southlake C-2 f Kimball Venture „C-3„ ; �3 R.O.W. 2" 2 "C- 2A3A1 So" ufhlake—Kimball // Venture 2 r H- Carr 2 ` , R_ Lyford AG „C_2„ J. Miller 2A SPIN REPRESENTATIVE 47 DARRELL FAGLIE 7G-3 City of Southlake, Texas No.: 96_12� Project Name: it �.Ia 1 1111 1 rM 0.1 Review No: Three Date of Review-10/11/96 CITY STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE ABOVE.REFERENCED PROJECT RECEIVED BY THE CITY ON laoM AND WE OFFER THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS. THESE STIPULATIONS ARE HEREBY MADE CONDITIONS OF' srm PLAN APPROVAL UNLESS SPECIFICALLY AMENDED BY THE CITY COUNCIL. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR NEED FURTHER CLARIFICATION, PLEASE CONTACT DENNIS KILLOUGH AT (817) 481-5581, EXT. 787. Correct the following items in the Site Data Summary Chart: Percentage of site coverage 19 % ('/o of net area covered by bldg. footod Required Parking 72 spaces 2. The following changes are needed with regard to the provided Interior Landscape : A. Although the plan exceeds the total .square footage required in interior landscaping area, the ordinance requires that 75% of the required area (i.e., 7,125 s.f. x 0.75 = 5,344 s.f..) be in the front and along the sides of the building. The plan shows�approximately 4,278 s.f in the front and along the sides of the building. (P & ZAction 10103196. delete) B. The row of parking directly adjacent to the north side of the building and the two rows of parking south of the building each require one additional 9'xl8'f landscape parking island. 3. Provide horizontal and vertical articulation of the north, east, south, -and west facades of the building according to the requirements Ordinance 480-S, Section 43.9.c.1.c. Compliance. with the articulation requirements are listed in the attached Articulation Evaluation chart. P & ZACTION: September 19, 1996;. Approved (7-0) to table until October 3, 1996 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. October 3, 1996; Approved (4-2) subject to Staff Review Summary No. 2 dated September 27, 1996, deleting Item # 3A (requiring 75% of required interior landscaping area be in the front and along the sides of the building). 7G-4 City of Southlake, Texas * No review of proposed signs is intended with this site plan- A separate building permit is required prior to construction.,of any signs. No review of the landscaping is intended with this Site Plan Landscape and irrigation plans meeting the requirements of Ordinance No. 544 will be required prior to the issuance of a building permit. * It appears that this property lies within the 75 'LDN D/FW Regional Airport Overlay Zone will require construction standards'69 meet requirements of the Airport Compatible Land Use Zoning Ordinance No. 479. * The applicant should be aware that prior to issuance of a building permit a Plat must be processed and filed in the County Plat Records; a fully corrected site plan, landscape plan, irrigation plan, and building plans must be submitted for approval and all required fees must be paid. This may include but not be limited to the following fees: Park Fee, Roadway, Water & Sewer Impact and Tap Fees, and related Permit Fees. * A letter of permission from the adjacent property owner(s) on the west must be obtained prior to issuance of a building permit for the constriction of the off -site pavement and a permit from TxDOT must be obtained prior to any curb cut along F.M. 1709. * Please be aware that any change of tenant/owners with a request for a new C.O. will require that all. parking areas meet the "all weather surface" requirement in the zoning ordinance and all fire lanes shall be per the Fire Department's requirements. Denotes Informational Comment att: Articulation Evaluation chart cc: Southlake Kimball Venture Ltd. Robert W. Kelly Architect, Inc. L:%W P-FMM\REV\96\96-121 SP.3 7G-5 0 Articulation Evaluation No. 3 Case No. ZA 96-121 Date of Evaluation: 10/11/96 LTations for Southlake Center at Kimball, Lot 2, Block 1 Perry/Allen Addition Received 10/07/96 Front - facing: North Wall ht. = 20 Horizontal articulation Vertical articulation Required Provided Delta Okay? Required Provided Delta Okay? Max. wall length 60 60 0% Yes 60 60 00/0 Yes Min. artic. offset 3 3 00/0 Yes 3 4 33% Yes Min. artic. length 12 18 50% Yes 12 18 50% Yes P. Side - facing: West Wall ht. = 24 Horizontal articulation Vertical articulation Required Provided Delta Okay? Required Provided Delta Okay? Max. wall length 72 40 44% Yes 72 40 44% Yes Min. artic. offset 4 3 25% No 4 4 0% Yes Min. artic. length 10 36 260% Yes 10 36 260% Yes L. Side - facing East Wall ht. = 24 Horizontal articulation . Vertical articulation Required Provided Delta Okay? Required Provided Delta Okay? Max. wall length 72 40 44% Yes 72 40 44% Yes Min. artic. offset 4 3 25% No 4 4 00/0 Yes Min: artic. length 10 36 260% Yes 10 36 260% Yes par - facing: South Wall ht. = 17 Horizontal articulation Vertical articulation Required Provided Delta Okay? Required Provided Delta Okay? Max. wall length 51 190 273% No 51, 60 18% No Min. antic. offset 3 0 100% No 3 4 33% Yes Min. artic. length 13 0 1000/0 No 12 15 25% Yes L 7G-6 '..warm vm man a� faaataw +w ai p O� i Iaa 14 /(peg 'M -11b6W1>I lb 3JI`d�-I.Lf108 a.dq% �111:1.11 s 111 1 4 as atoll 11111 All 11 f / Jill %-Y 1 afou J3P108RTMlull lb I Af r i --------------------- ----------iL II avow Tivwn 7G-7 'am i� fill cc rn O H U 0 IN W H N . -rrbev4N unigum Im awl %mole v wee wee ew enM. Ka 0 IV EdalAeo 3w-"I—S u 1 a o• a 1 y a a o QIJ 11 0 0 1 LL 7G-8 L ©t tOa a u s a s a! 4 0 a �pa>I M ajagod 7G-9 co rn rn ti 0 CU O 6 City of Southlake, Texas STAFF REPORT October 11, 1996 CASE NO: ZA 6-96 PROJECT: Ordinance No. 480-212 / First Reading Rezoning / Site Plan - Cimmarron Acres STAFF CONTACT: Karen Gandy, Zoning Administrator 481-5581, ext. 743 Dennis Killough, Planner I 481-5581, ext. 787 REQUESTED ACTION: Rezoning and Site Plan for City Ground Storage Water Tanks on proposed Lot 5R6, Block 3, Cimmarron Acres Addition, being a portion of Lot 5, Block 3, Cimmarron Acres as originally recorded in Volume 388-181, Pg. 8, P.R.T.C.T. and being approximately 3.331 acres situated in the J.G. Allen Survey, Abstract No.18. LOCATION: Northeast corner of Pearson Lane and Southlake Boulevard (F.M. 1709). OWNER\APPLICANT: City of Southlake ZONING: "C-2" Local Retail Commercial District REQUESTED ZONING: "CS" Community Service District LAND USE CATEGORY: Mixed Use (may include residential and office buildings, hotels, and commercial and retail centers that serve local and regional needs) CORRIDOR Retail Commercial (same as in, 0-1, C-1, C-2, C-3, and B-1 districts) RECOMMENDATION: NO. NOTICES SENT: Eight (8) RESPONSES: None P & Z ACTION: August 15, 1996; Approved (7-0) applicants request to table until the September 5, 1996 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting. September 5, 1996; Approved (7-0) applicants request to table until the October 3, 1996 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting. October 3, 1996; Approved (6-0), subject to Staff Review Summary No. 2 dated September 27, 1996, deleting Items #1 (any proposed building on the site which exceeds one story or 20' in height requires setback to be determined by a 4:1 slope line from the property line), #2 (proposed 8A-1 driveway intersecting the north line of F.M. 1709 must be a minimum of 500' from the northeast intersection of F.M. 1709 and Pearson Lane), and #3 (providing horizontal and vertical articulation on the proposed building facades). STAFF COMMENTS: The applicant has met all items in Staff Review No. 1 dated August 2, 1996 and Staff Review Summary No. 2 dated September 27, 1996 with the exception of those items in the attached Staff Review Summary No. 3 dated October 11, 1996. L:\WP-FILES\UEMO\96CASES\96-096RS.WPD 8A-2 I (ore �L 6 4A 1 4H 7 A 2 B J. W&LaER j ^I SWI Y A—fW4 6A1 4 6812 68681A6BIA T71 681 IAIA AIA IAIA AIA to '�'-�"6B6 2C 2 2D 2 i i 695 6B228 683 —.J�.1•�. 1 � ._ J LL y 684 i I ril to -•------� .. �. 1 r'-- - KELLER — 6BI1 Cl UMI T 1 3F3 3F1D 3D7 3D 3A 3 3E 3E1A 38 9 19 ° ° 9A2 9A1A { ' 3f8 3FIC 1 3F5 3F1N D 1 2 3 9A 9A1 Q 7F9 3F1H -- 7H J i E 98 - t 3D2. • 3F1K _. 3FI JFI JK xl -' 3FI 3F1L 5G % 3E1 i I 1�• 9C31 -- Y6 YIA N�I I i ! .�1F x i i 103 I YIN 7C 7 7B 7A- �. 6A 60 8A2B•�I� 3 fe 8 JOH N N. FRE ® R 7.8 Ac 29 2 ` 29 I 1 SLR4£1' A—32/ 'Ac 19 Ac 3-33 6 Ac 9.5i ,AcAc Ac --�0 —�-- Ac 1 uu •. C 9.64 Ac BA3 8 8 80 is 1 iE 6 FLDRENCE II•EK• 12.8 Ac �` SCHOOL E 11 fA " r --'-- C � 2E 9.3 Ac 2F 2F e� 2F1 C%- CjFI'- --- 20 Ac -__ -._-._.rt-."- �' 2CI4 ZCIS 2DI �. 1K 1 _ _T-•-.S" 2F3 A 2AIR •V Q� j 2C2 2C26 1 t _--- i j 1 2A1 1 MEST lAt 5A2A 4 C, IAl1A 5A 5 B x S. M 4 Q. d n E l� 5 6A 6AI { 4AIA 4E Ml 4A1 I 1 Er A —I/ 5C1 —y e 4A Al 4Al2 4141 a L- (�. - -._. 4E 10 At IH 4KI , � Q&4 IF Ac SAi 15.", 58 15.4 Ac ;- i-_ i 4J 4 I 91' flew tic i 2A2 k .7 _ _._ _ 6G A 6A 6A1 68 682 6 6E ; i+ 6 4B 4( w 6 Ac Ac 5 Ac 4A16 68 4A16A �.: .... 6G ', 6C2 CL 662 018 9.85 Ac 7 A< F 6HIA1 601B 015 36.17 Ac 09 8A�3 01 4A19 TRACT MAP R, a 5E W irt.In r ?.3 Ac ~ U 2 3 A noAv 1 ANF 1 24 n r7 3 MMP I 5 6 7 8 I JORDAN DR "C2" IZ Prudential Bache 1 6 I „C2" 1 2 4 — — State of Texas` State of Texas W SOUTHLAKE BLVD TR A5A .091 AC TR an2A r, 4 AC 3A TR 4AlA TRTAC TR 4I R 4A13A . 171 TR4A14A .165 0 4A17 TR 601 . 183 @ 11C211 TR .06 J Davis W Lee "AG" AG TR . 6D 'iF :•..:i TR.4A1 j :.; H:; 1.812 AC .45 @ Southlake PSE R Travis T Fleeger H Conrad I Ranch Land Leasing 8A-4 G Hill TO AA1n -- .. .-. Co rn Cr) 0 a— t = pp dvn ® 4� E�Irrbrg Eti `Ya ram j66j Ie+e� g t d rVU m Y B R nsz a� s YR§�d�$�� -�- a ���YYY 1 m zri taa innl,3(j a a s S i a �'7l © AoT'aww _N" MawTMYX 71} to?vmw *U SNrur I 911i■i_ s v 8 i ' L -- ,Z►'fOZ �.9£,1'0.00S DIY 1 t -- N EN ; c ' _ p�__ Y U EO ti 9 �YM im' 1 `NU Ln n N 0, .4 1 W I 1 ; u .sD£r �J�^i N1gis g i No('2t'49'w 4 W r; 270.00' b j of I..L 'ryN i I I Lr)'�O 1 $ m i�jn^I 3-OO,OOAON I N N N N N i QKJ �I I 1 � -•-I ,1 11 u J I n M{011U nl (0 NU ii " I 10 0 m' a' 10 CIO Li al 11 Iri n II ' ,t6'Z►Z ' „n 3.00,OOAON I I ii I Ln 1 I rn N 11 t 1Q Mj a ^ 11 11 b O'u ,►OY►Z i co I it CIO 3.00,00.00N \ N00' 1'l9'W 270.001 a I Y I ^ ,^ NQ n xm ' I 0 1 /-; � ay ) i 0 I u' 0 n'I tl CI I Q •Li'stZ I I O W 11 O SO � < of 3-00,00.00N Z H j� d• .C.S�S 3 _• =N '/� N.-,I.K.10.005 III 31 V0 W O^ HII 1 O 'In JO H l� W Ir Ifl .. PI —I ZII h tr 1 O N ; ;• iW I � to In i 11 J � ,.-• � � � � ' 11 RE �'^•� • ,f9'9►Z 7�a M'b .K .l0'OLZ 8 '49 9 K Sil'YYA M061 8 3r SZ.• (Tu w I.7YY[taY - �°w^_3xMMO -4o A.110 - - AMUM .4 AAl%� Aux, ma, Yi.aw = s oowr o.nor C, i E s 3� .Ea 1i ;j s i7 : fit ! yy I o I q � a 1 f j ji=ii j sl i 3 � � 3. Ply i .O I jd3fill I �r�i1i3jk g fj kit F a IV I �X _ivy I i 4, i` 2d�t1�� K11.7rrtsar �]Ur6 N77tr 9 + ' NIWI lJYtfSrY Ai1Y'K An 3SiY10 - « s -•t - I .; c0 rn rn 0 R51 WSJ � g II , 4Q OR.., YR ZL'I 17YI i7i'M }i7i)1 ,wut - ------ ----- ------ Zr'fCF I I , � In- W tr M N I- •41 7 �� �'An 1� 1 I , sm I .,OIY WW '7Y13 27M MO 4g1YiY1M '7,73 ilN.W' 1 Yt 'et ' B£,1.OAOS .. .1o•ocz -""" II II Ii 11 11 11 11 � o;I1 LnLO MID anon ;11 III rt 3N2/O W ^ 270.00' } /1 r r r tl tl t 9c1rz ' 3.00.00.00N I QKJ I 9 i- W a l Ot n MUU gel LOa tD o O:f nn d tl to Y / �O OO I {/�; �/���a LO H \+ I 11 � ,16'ZYZ ' 3.00.00.00N , It OW, 0 n' In Y/ tLn p O G� Q v' 0 � I �p —"� -gIm ,r0'rrZ 3.00.00.00N \ N00' 1'49-W t� n 71 p y 9' C� OU nl 117 Ina .o' 7 O �J 1 W - L.L : � .•I pl *m tl I6 1nGo iY V 3.00,00.00N z OJO NIAU 071 -._ ( i __.__._ - i O .4 o„ II 1A _ _ j O SISK � T -"- 31 ='N ,0 N �..K.,11005 �V III Hi ij 0�'n �IOn pt ,� a mi t`> ON it ' YN W W u ' II ✓ J I o S I M1 v�t ✓ / 11 10 � ZW I i 1 It I p• J I ,9,9vz i � l—W.Cr - ' ua�w,•ry .a ,0'OLZ -- g ,Y9'9 tS 53INYA .NOB 8 3.R. tYs N7nr � .: u.il Uvms,Y �1^ V t71' 3J V7H.Ln08 -40 A1/0 - - — - - 8� T7 M .-w»lrc+i z z o = Q. SU I 00 U) I, Go I H I� '_gi iv I 1 R 1 Lo i 11a yYie IL'- 8A-5 vYr a.<w wv: 1 City of Southlake, Texas No.: ZA 996 Review No: Three Date of Review: 10/11/96 OWNER/APPLICANT: •m•t- ENGINEER: CITY STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE ABOVE REFERENCED PROJECT RECEIVED BY THE CITY ON 10/07/96 AND WE OFFER THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS. THESE STIPULATIONS ARE HEREBY MADE CONDITIONS OF SITE PLAN APPROVAL UNLESS SPECIFICALLY,AMENDED BY THE CITY COUNCIL. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ORNEED FURTHER -CLARIFICATION, -PLEASE CONTACT DENNIS KILLOUGH AT (.817) 481-5581, EXT. 787.CITY 1. The proposed ground storage tanks exceed 20' in height which requires a setback determined by a 4:1 slope line from the north property line. No part of the structure can encroach above the slope line. The proposed ground storage tanks encroach the 4:1 slope line. (P & ZACTION 10103196: delete) The proposed driveway intersecting the north line of F.M. 1709 must be a minimum of 500' from the northeast intersection of F.M. 1709 and Pearson Lane. The driveway spacing provided is 375'. (P & Z ACTION 10103196. delete) 3. Provide horizontal and vertical articulation on the proposed building facades according to the requirements Ordinance 480, Section 43.9.c.1.c. Compliance with the, articulation requirements are listed in the attached Articulation Evaluation Chart. Please note that no detailed evaluation was done on the proposed disinfection building because no wall of this building exceeds 3 times the wall height: (P & ZACTION 10103196. delete) P & ZACTION August 15, 1996; Approved (7-0) applicants request to table until the September 5, 1996 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting. September 5, 1996; Approved (7-0) applicants request to table until the October 3, 1996 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting. October 3, 1996; Approved (6-0), subject to Staff Review Summary No. 2 dated September 27, 1996, deleting Items #1 (any proposed building on the site which exceeds one story or 20' in height requires setback to be determined by a 4:1 slope line from the property line), #2 (proposed, driveway intersecting the north line of F.M. 1709 must be a minimum of 500' from the northeast intersection of F.M. 1709 and Pearson Lane), and #3 (providing horizontal and vertical articulation on the proposed building facades). 8A-6 City of Southlake, Texas A permit from Tx:DOT must be obtained prior to any curb cut along F.M. 1709. * No review of the specific landscaping or irrigation is intended with this; Site Plan. Separate landscape and irrigation plans meeting the requirements of Ord. 544 will be required prior to the issuance of a building permit. * The applicant should be aware that prior to issuance of a building permit a Plat Revision must be processed and filed in the County Plat Records, a fully corrected site plan, landscape plan, irrigation plan, and building plans, must be submitted for approval. * Denotes Informational Comment att: Articulation Evaluation Chart cc: Cheatham & Associates L:\WP- P3 8A-7 Articulation Evaluation No. I Case No. ZA 96-96 Date of Evaluation: 8/08/96 C'ations for City of Southlake Ground Storage and Booster Pump Station Received 8/08/96 Control & Instrumentation Building Front - facing: West Wall ht. = 11 Horizontal articulation Vertical articulation Required Provided Delta Okay? Required Provided Delta Okay? Max. wall length 33 20 39% Yes 33 20 39% Yes Min. artic. offset 2 10 400% Yes 2 4 100% Yes Min. artic. length 5 10 100% Yes 5 10 100% Yes R. Side - facing: South Wall ht. = 11 Horizontal articulation Vertical articulation Required Provided Delta Okay? Required Provided Delta Okay? Max. wall length 33 30 9% Yes 33 30 90/0 Yes Min. artic. offset 2 10 400% Yes 2 4 100% Yes Min. artic. length 8 10 25% Yes 8 10 25% Yes L. Side - facing North Wall ht. = 11 Horizontal articulation Vertical articulation Required Provided Delta Okay? Required Provided Delta Okay? Max. wall length 33 30 9% Yes 33 30 9% Yes Min. artic. offset 2 10 400% Yes 2 4 100% Yes Min. artic. length 8 10 25% Yes 8 10 25% Yes Cr - facing: East Wall ht. = 11 Horizontal articulation Vertical articulation Required Provided Delta Okay? Required' Provided Delta Okay? Max. wall length 33 . 40 21% No 33 40 21% No Min. artic. offset 2 0 100% No 2 0 ' 100% No Min. artier length 8 0 1000/0 No 8 0 100% No A 8A-8 rn rn � c ~ � ; ; o <a ! boos yEliza ,rI I Nil .0 i of a i •i 1 ' I II i I I � IR 1 NEW c t�;I 8A-9 Cep pia i H11 id21. r I I I II II 'JiQr'R9�llTMR\i A'.1.��/1 8A-10 ,A- VON ONVON0NQ v4Nvn%0 NkoZINON4! 8A-11 CIT 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 _.... sunder 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 YDOCS\ORD\CASES\480-212.CS Page I$A_12 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: Being on the southemportron of , ;CimiriarronAcres°Addition, being LACTYDOCS\ORD\CASES\480-212.CS $A-13 Page 2 acres situated in th ,' and more fully and completely described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein, from to as depicted on the approved Site Plan attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit "B". Section 2. That the City Manager is hereby directed to correct the Official Zoning map of the City of Southlake, Texas, to reflect the herein changes in zoning. Section 3. That in all other respects the use of the tract or tracts of land herein above described shall be subject to all the applicable regulations contained in said Zoning Ordinance and all other applicable and pertinent ordinances for the City of Southlake, Texas. All existing sections, subsections, paragraphs, sentences, words, phrases and definitions of said Zoning Ordinance are not amended hereby, but remain intact and are hereby ratified, verified, and affirmed. Section 4. That the zoning regulations and districts as herein established have been made in accordance with the comprehensive plan for the purpose of promoting the health, safety, morals and the general welfare of the community. They have been designed, with respect to both present conditions and the conditions reasonably anticipated to exist in the foreseeable future; to lessen congestion in the streets; to provide adequate light and air; to prevent over -crowding of land; to avoid undue concentration of population; and to facilitate the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewerage, drainage and surface water, parks and other commercial needs and development of the community. They have been made after a full and complete hearing with reasonable consideration among other things of the character of the district and its peculiar suitability for the particular uses and with a view of conserving the value of buildings and encouraging the most appropriate use of land throughout the community. 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 LACTYDOCS\ORD\CASES\480-212.CS g Page 3 A_ 14 or not, under such ordinances, same shall not be affected by this ordinance but may be prosecuted (woe, until final disposition by the courts. M 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 , 1996. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY PASSED AND APPROVED on the 2nd reading the day of , 1996. L:\CTYDOCS\ORD\CASES\480-212.CS gA-15 Page 4 MAYOR A APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: CITY ATTORNEY DATE: ADOPTED: EFFECTIVE: LACTYDOCS\ORD\CASES\480-212.CS SA-16 Page 5 Ac ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY EXHIBIT "A" Being a portion of Lot 5, Block 3, Cimmarron Acres Addition to the City of South as recorded in Volume 388-181, Page 08, Plat Records, Tarrant County, Texas, said real property being situated in the Jesse G. Allen Survey, Abstract No. 18, and bei more particularly described by metes and bounds as follows: ng COMMENCING at the southwest corner of Lot 6, Block 3 of said Cimmarron Acres Addition said point being in the east right-of-way line of Pearson Lane and the no right-of-way line of Southlake Boulevard (F.M. 1709); rth THENCE N 89038' 1 1 " E, along said north right-of-way line of Southlake Boulevar 200.00 feet passing the southwest corner of said Lot 5, continuing in all, a distan d at of 390.00 feet, to the POINT OF BEGINNING; ce THENCE N 00021'49" W, a distance of 270.00 fe et, to a point for corner; THENCE N 89 ° 38' 11 " E, a distance of 537.45 feet, to a point for corner; THENCE S 00021'49" E, a distance of 270.00 feet, to a point for corner in the no right-of-way line of Southlake Boulevard (F.M. 1709); rth THENCE S 89 ° 38' 11 " W, along said north right-of-way line of F. of 537.45 feet, to the POINT OF BEGINNING, and containing 145,111709 square co 3.331 acres of land, more or less. r 34 L:\CTYDOCS\ORD\CASES\480-212.CS CS Page 6 8A-17 EXHIBIT "B" co rn rn g c � !-- OW o d i r O cF ._ u y e e a ��1 x I iLLE� az `# ^� I 11 II , Wh � 1 'ba o IE VU II IW I I I II i �W 5oc21'49'E ` C' I t . I lh( . 1 �g 1 I a L:\CTYDOCS\ORD\CASES\480-212.CS Page 7 8A-18 t1gg�l�, ,.lo lo lm City of Southlake, Texas STAFF REPORT kaw October 11, 1996 CASE NO: ZA 6- 7 PROJECT: Ordinance No. 480-213 / First Reading Rezoning / Cimmarron Acres STAFF CONTACT: Karen Gandy, Zoning Administrator 481-5581, ext. 743 Dennis Killough, Planner I 481-5581, ext. 787 REQUESTED ACTION: Rezoning of proposed Lots 5R1, 5R2, 5R3 and 5R4, Block 3, Cimmarron Acres Addition, being a portion of Lot 5, Block 3, Cimmarron Acres Addition, as originally recorded in Volume 388-181, Page 8, P.R.T.C.T., and being approximately 4.742 acres situated in the J.G. Allen Survey, Abstract No. 18. AMENDED REQUEST: Rezoning of proposed Lots 5R1, 5R2, 5R3, 5R4, and 6R1, Block 3, Cimmarron Acres Addition, being a portion of Lot 5 and a portion of Lot 6, Block 3, Cimmarron Acres Addition and being approximately 7.037 acres situated in the J.G. Allen Survey, Abstract No. 18. LOCATION: Southeast corner of North Pearson Lane and Jordan Drive WNER/APPLICANT: City of Southlake CURRENT ZONING: "C2" Local Retail Commercial District REQUESTED ZONING: "SF-lA" Single Family Residential District LAND USE CATEGORY: Mixed Use (may include residential and office buildings, hotels, and commercial and retail centers that serve local and regional needs) NO. NOTICES SENT: Eight (8) RESPONSES: One (1) written response was received from within the 200' notification area: • Johnnie F. Brumbalow. 3002 W. Southlake Blvd., Southlake, Tx, in favor. A petition was received for the original request stating that "owners of marron Acres Addition oppose the replatting of block 3 as proposed. will not support these changes only if all property abutting Jordan -t is rezoned residential." Three (3) petitioners are within the 200' 1cation area: D. Tucker, 2517 McGee Street, Fort Worth, Texas 76112. fanet Tucker, 2517 McGee Street, Fort Worth, Texas 76112. I.D. Gibson, 6401 Bradley Avenue, Suite E, Haltom City, Texas am 76117. Two (2) petitioners are not within the 200' notification area: • Larry Kates, 3301 Gray Lane, Southlake. • James Anderson, 3220 W. Southlake Boulevard, #N, Southlake, Tx. P & Z ACTION: August 15, 1996; Approved (7-0) applicant's request to table until the September 5, 1996 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting. September 5, 1996; Approved (7-0) applicant's request to table until the October 3, 1996 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting. October 3, 1996; Approved (6-0) STAFF COMMENTS: Please note that a change of zoning to the "SF -IA" Single Family Residential District does not require a Concept Plan Review by Staff. \WP-FELES\MEMO\96CASFS\96-099Z. WPD NJ Attached is a Petition to Modify Plat Restrictions (received 10-03-96) signed by fourteen (14) residents of Cimmarron Acres, requesting to modify the restrictions pertaining to the plat of Cimmarron Acres as recorded in Volume 388-181, Page 8, Tarrant County Plat Records. go PETITION TO MODIFY PLAT RESTRICTIONS STATE OF TEXAS § COUNTY OF TARRANT § We the undersigned, being owners of the below described property in Cimmarron Acres, hereby petition to modify the restrictions pertaining to the plat of Cimmarron Acres as recorded in Volume 388-181, Page 8, Tarrant County Plat Records on January 9, 1985, modifying the following restriction as it applies to Lots 5 and 6, Block 3, Cimmarron Acres: "No access to Jordan Drive will be permitted from Lot 5 and Lot 6 of Block 3," ' to read as follows: "Only lots with single-family residential zoning shall be permitted access to Jordan Drive." Following this modification, access to Jordon Drive will be permitted from Lot 5 and Lot 6, Block 3 or platted revisions of Lot 5 and Lot 6, Block 3, provided that the lots have single-family residential zoning. This petition shall be filed as a dedicatory instrument with the :ounty clerk of Tarrant County, Texas. Witness my/our hands this _ day of , 1996. Lot Block Address 8` 3//0 #V_ J REC'D 0 C T 0 31996 ��L:\WP-FILES\ESMT-ROW.-PV\PV\CIMPETIT.ION - August 13, 1996 Page I oft N 17 3 3 Sao Lgygu-u E 1, 1,, uh W (JcA,) , certify that the above instrument is a true and correct copy of a petition to modify restrictions executed by the owners of at least seventy- five percent (75%) of the real property in Cimmarron Acres, and that all record owners of property in this subdivision were notified of this proposed modification by hand delivery or regular mail. SUB CRIBED AND SWORN to before me the undersigned authority on this 90 day of , 1996. um�cao 2o~`�r pOB<<, LAURIE M. SHEETS * Notary Public Notary'Public in and or the State of Texas STATE OF TEXAS o PS My Comm. Exp. 10/30/99 LL:\WP-FILES\ESMT-ROW.-PV\PV\CIMPETIT.ION - August I g 3, 1996 Page 2 of 1L 3A 6 6A1 l 4A 14H 7 A 2 B J. WALKER SLO Y A-1604 6A1 m� 6812 6B 1 4 -1 1 .1.- i _-..i -4 l L 1 605 683 684 6c 6811 KELLER Cl UMIT 3 ]F1D 3M 3D 3A 3 X 3E1 38 Z g 9 9 9A2 "IA B 3FIC 5 3FlH i p 1 D D 2 3 7F16 •- 3m t, 9A 9A1 g 3EIM � a 90 3p2 Jf ll( Y* Yl 3cl 9B1 3n I 3FlE 3H 3E1 'f '6 NIA 3 NIG 3111 IO JFff 3c 11 3FIN ••�. IV 8 x 7 7B 7A 6 6D BA28 JOH J. FRE ® fM 7.B A< 2 E < 5 W. Y A-= + A 9 0 Zq Ac 19 Ac �e 6 Ac 9.5'Ac 1 ••. 6 6I&AMim2dc9.64 Ac ftl .1011NSON ROAO 3 1 IE ZC5 2C7 2p 2G2 2C32C9 ics 68 12121 FIARENCE ELE L - SCHOOL IZ8 AC �, i i --- —r-- �SI1�1E,� E M IE 1•'� 2D --- j '�1 i^• 2E 1 �C If ,L- -+� —•— --1 9.3 Ac 2F e 2n — `jl - 1'- M Ac ---- --t-•� 2L14 2l75 201 1N v g$ 1 A 2A1' V� IC26 1 1 i ' 2A1 K5T IAt SAZA 4 5 y� �. A LSE f� 5 6A 6A1 m 4AtA Er A-18 Ml ~ i 5q 1 /H1 4A M12 4L1 156 0 Ac 4H 4F 5A1 61:L 4N 4L C &4 Ac 1 A[I 15.4 Ac j i _ I 2A2 Y - - bG AP &A 6AI 68 6W 6 6E 6 4A16 48 4C 40 6 Ac Ac SAC 7 66 4AI" 1 - . �• 6B2 4AI8 9.85 Ac 9.85 Ac 19.7 Ac ..... r� E 661At 6616 4A15 3617 Ac 4A19 n4�1 8B-5 TRACT MAP zRB SE �< I 1 1�©wo H ADJACENT OWNERS cc W AND ZONING j J J Spin Representative #15 i C Wayne and June Haney 1 1 2 3 4 L.D. Tucker I GRAY LANE IN I I 2 � r] Av J. Anderson 3 4 MAR M - � "SF-1 All LD Tuckeri A Gibson' °., entl -, B.fi erns JORDAN DR a� I� i Prudential Bache C2 VR 4A13A . 17 1@ TR4A14A .165 Q 4A17 3 @ - T .645 AC I Prudential Bache 2 cr O J J 3 "AG w J Wilder Cl "SF-1 A" 4 M Talaber B Brumbalow J Brumbalow W SOUTHLAKE BLVD TR44A2A TR 4A3A TR 4ASA TR 4A4A 06 AC ApON 1 �A-3 2.0 L' F am. TR.4A3 TR.4A1 1.34 AC 1.812 AC W Brumbalow TR 4E( 1 TR.4A101 TO A,�:) cc rn _rn 01 Iwo as, 0 a u . i C' tb„ilt q O I h'€ 8 8 o qny SiF ilk I W OR a2% .n , Y�i YCob Y84��io3 •�- ee e � � a F � � _ 6 Monica rue Mo W8An9'1rl7ILI yauar suirMl �ir . F 2 -W. � M.9£,40.00S to la-atfA /n6'3� scl 'tsa2 __ ___LL I. 1 s Ir .z+rot ; � - ,lo•o�z-------- I. , Mos ' ; • i BE if ��E U i� oii I 33Ef OF 73 t s 4W n�� 1 jj 7 ts [ •f J - M Y/ (no *m u ry n , I I II I t if i;_ ��� #r I i N00'21'19"W II I �3 � 3 it 1-:w �; 270.00' fit F p� N 1 Ln �o / i ii IM- fill •- +J ri5 . ; 11 I :oil M M q p 3.00.00.WN I i i I ,I aCt� ao.i3i . 8 W 4rn ii I I �: i E Ej t 6 I W I Q ' d � t sii�3 ±t i o ya ' ^' lanaiE�� dt 'I II e' i vn M O4 s'CIO si is fill �r= it js ji l 1 it ii T 3.00,00A0N fill, . , till � I � j'.� � 33 NN O 'I 3 , �t shy yjjyyyy Nu, rII Ln � III,, Rh t u t� Qi3: a p x€I Ii I� -� Q u ro iiz I I co -^ 3.00,0 0 A0 N I \ N00.2l'49"W 270.00,:g n t yq� p H YY OW DA` w�:ai 1mLC _ n tMGwZ 0.0•O 3.00,00A0N JOO I.O 0 N11 �n NNcWUa�i •_0._S00�r _On" iIIIiiiiiIII . II'1 1rIIIII ti� iy3 l d9h 7�3d• j5�E�L �fI N �o i 1 0 M1 /~;m� W J ' II I I 7� iiii� fpp((,� 0p{F3isF In ZW 7 �'" c .rl Mos E's ¢4� 1 ciJ as epal-aafn i EE •mow• 'l N53-80•rf .100a 1 �� it0I ii k ii rarsMmv r 8 .f9'9lS s3rarn Mob1 $ 3.6Z,40.00N� L ti i o o <w u•slser _ _ —�i V7 m - / ar ,Is ans �unr arc ? 's'. KlI.1I livMI56Y 8B iMY'li MIYYn NO• JDVAUWV IARE !.olSU 70 '` � �' d � • ' � • « � . 3T/G{'f76y/1y/.yY0y8 �0 A_1_/3 O _ _ (^� y�v� - - - — - - Y� I fi/1 �O Al/3 11 MO TK bd TIro'M - S DCM9 'O lll btl - rl _ 'tl- i pa[yy�y� �M '• WHEREAS, the City of Southlake, Texas is a home rule City acting under its Charter adopted by the electorate pursuant to Article M, 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 Go under the City's Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance; and WHEREAS, a change in the zoning classification of said property was requested by a person ce 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 L:\CTYDOCS\ORD\CASES\480-213.SF1 gB-g Page 1 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, (aw is hereby amended so that the permitted uses in the hereinafter described areas be altered, changed and amended as shown and described below: L:\CTYDOCS\ORD\CASES\480-213.SF1 8B-9 Page 2 Section 2. That the City Manager is hereby directed to correct the Official Zoning map of the City of Southlake, Texas, to reflect the herein changes in zoning. Section 3. That in all other respects the use of the tract or tracts of land herein above described shall be subject to all the applicable regulations contained in said Zoning Ordinance and all other applicable and pertinent ordinances for the City of Southlake, Texas. All existing sections, subsections, paragraphs, sentences, words, phrases and definitions of said Zoning Ordinance are not amended hereby, but remain intact and are hereby ratified, verified, and affirmed. Section 4. That the zoning regulations and districts as herein established have been made in accordance with the comprehensive plan for the purpose of promoting the health, safety, morals and the general welfare of the community. They have been designed, with respect to both present conditions and the conditions reasonably anticipated to exist in the foreseeable future; to lessen congestion in the streets; to provide adequate light and air; to prevent over -crowding of land; to avoid undue concentration of population; and to facilitate the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewerage, drainage and surface water, parks and other commercial needs and development of the community. They have been made after a full and complete hearing with reasonable consideration among other things of the character of the district and its peculiar suitability for the particular uses and with a view of conserving the value of buildings and encouraging the most appropriate use of land throughout the community. Section 5. That this ordinance shall be cumulative of all other ordinances of the City of Southlake, Texas; affecting zoning and shall not repeal any of the provisions of said ordinances except in those instances where provisions of those ordinances are in direct conflict with the provisions of this ordinance. Section 6. That the terms and provisions of this ordinance shall be deemed to be severable and that if the validity of the zoning affecting any portion of the tract or tracts of land described herein shall be declared to be invalid, the same shall not affect the validity of the zoning of the balance of said tract or tracts of land described herein. Section 7. Any person, firm or corporation who violates, disobeys, omits, neglects or refuses to comply with or who resists the enforcement of any of the provisions of this ordinance shall be fined not more than Two Thousand Dollars ($2,000.00) for each offense. Each day that a violation is permitted to exist shall constitute a separate offense. Section 8. All rights and remedies of the City of Southlake are expressly saved as to any and all violations of the provisions of Ordinance No. 480, as amended, or any other ordinances affecting zoning which have accrued at the time of the effective date of this ordinance; and, as to such accrued violations and all pending litigation, both civil and criminal, whether pending in court L:\CTYDOCS\ORD\CASES\480-213.SF1 gB-10 Page 3 A 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 , 1996. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY PASSED AND APPROVED on the 2nd reading the day of , 1996. L:\CTYDOCS\ORD\CASES\480-213.SF1 $$-11 Page 4 MAYOR 31 APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: CITY ATTORNEY DATE: ADOPTED: (4,., EFFECTIVE: A L:\CTYDOCS\ORD\CASES\480-213.SF1 $I3-12 Page 5 ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY Coe EXHIBIT "A" Being a portion of Lot 5 and Lot 6, Block 3, Cimmarron Acres Addition to the City of Southlake, as recorded in Volume 388-181, Page 08, Plat Records, Tarrant County, Texas, said real property being situated in the Jesse G. Allen Survey, Abstract No. 18, and being more particularly described by metes and bounds as follows: BEGINNING at the northwest corner of Lot 6, Block 3 of said Cimmarron Acres Addition; THENCE N 90000'00" E, along the south right-of-way line of Jordan Drive at 200 feet passing the northwest corner of said Lot 5, and continuing in all a distance of 860.69 feet, to a point of curvature of a circular curve concave to the northeast having a radius of 50.00 feet, a central angle of 133117'22", and a long chord bearing N 76128'42" E, a distance of 91.81 feet; THENCE Southeasterly and Northeasterly, alongsaid 116.32 feet, to a point for corner; curve an arc length of THENCE S 8001 1'53" E, a distance of 332.28 feet, to a point for corner; THENCE S 00004'36" W, a distance of 203.42 feet, to a point for corner; THENCE 89 *38' 1 1 " W, a distance of 1277.46 feet, to a point for corner in the east line of Pearson Lane; THENCE N 00°00'00" E, a distance of 246.63 feet, to the POINT OF BEGINNING, and containing 306,603 square feet, or 7.039 acres of land, more or less. L:\CTYDOCS\ORD\CASES\480-213.SF1 813-13 Page 6 City of Southlake, Texas STAFF REPORT October 11, 1996 CASE NO: ZA 96-98 PROJECT: Plat Revision - Cimmarron Acres STAFF CONTACT: Karen Gandy, Zoning Administrator 481-5581, ext. 743 Dennis Killough, Planner I 481-5581, ext. 787 REQUESTED ACTION: Plat Revision for Lots 5R1, 5R2, 5R3, 5R4, 5R5, 5R6, 6R1, and 6R2, Block 3, Cimmarron Acres Addition, being a revision of Lots 5 and 6, Block 3, Cimmarron Acres Addition, as recorded in Volume 388-181, Page 8, P.R.T.C.T., and being approximately 14.957 acres situated in the J.G. Allen Survey, Abstract No. 18. AMENDED REQUEST: Plat Revision for Lots 5R1, 5R2, 5R3, 5R4, 5R5, 5R6, 5R7, 6R1, and 6R2, Block 3, Cimmarron Acres Addition, being a revision of Lots 5 and 6, Block 3, Cimmarron Acres Addition, as recorded in Volume 388-181, Page 8, P.R.T.C.T., and being approximately 14.957 acres situated in the J.G. Allen Survey, Abstract No. 18. LOCATION: Northeast corner of Pearson Lane and Southlake Boulevard (F.M. 1709) OWNER\APPLICANT: City of Southlake CURRENT ZONING: "C-2" Local Retail Commercial District REQUESTED ZONING: "SF-lA" Single Family Residential District (Lots 5R1, 5R2, 5R3 & 5R4); "CS" Community Service District (Lot 5R5); and "C-2" Neighborhood Commercial District (Lots 5R6, 6R1 & 6R2) AMENDED REQUESTED ZONING: "SF -IA" Single Family Residential District (Lots 5R1, 5R2, 5R3, 5R4, 5R5, and 6R1); "CS" Community Service District (Lot 5R5); and "C-2" Neighborhood Commercial District (Lot 6R2) LAND USE CATEGORY: Mixed Use (may include residential and office buildings, hotels, and commercial and. retail centers that serve local and regional needs) CORRIDOR Retail Commercial (same as in, 0-1, C-1, C-2, C-3, and B-1 districts) RECOMMENDATION: NO. NOTICES SENT: Seventeen (17) 8C-1 ZESPONSES: One (1) written response received within the 200' notification area: • Johnnie Brumbalow. 3002 W. Southlake Blvd, Southlake, Texas 76092, in favor. A petition for the original request was received stating that "owners of Cimmarron Acres Addition oppose the replatting of block 3 as proposed. We will not support these changes only if all property abutting Jordan Street is rezoned residential." Three (3) petitioners are within the 200' notification area: • L.D. Tucker, 2517 McGee Street, Fort Worth, Texas 76112. • Janet Tucker, 2517 McGee Street, Fort Worth, Texas 76112. • A.D. Gibson, 6401 Bradley Avenue, Suite E, Haltom City, Texas 76117. Two (2) petitioners are not within the 200' notification area: Larry Kates, 3301 Gray Lane, Southlake. James Anderson, 3220 W. Southlake Boulevard, #N, Southlake, Tx. P & Z ACTION: August 15, 1996; Approved (7-0) applicant's request to table until the September 5, 1996 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting. September 5, 1996; Approved (7-0) applicant's request to table until the (4w October 3, 1996 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting. October 3, 1996; Approved (6-0), subject to Staff Review Summary No. 2, deleting Item #4C (common access easement located along east line of Lot 6R2 does not meet the minimum centerline spacing requirement). STAFF COMMENTS: The applicant has met all items in Staff Review Summary No. 1 dated August 2, 1996 and Staff Review Summary No. 2 dated September 27, 1996 with the exception of those items in the attached Staff Review Summary No. 3 dated October 11, 1996. L:\WP-FILES\MEMO\96CASES\96-098PR.WPD 14 8C-2 608 2A1 t WA IA li A6A W. WALKER 1 I 1 t '( t� 1 SLRWY A-1604 1 I i 1 IA i i , ; i 6A1 Y ' I 68 6812 k - — t�1,.76V 1 / T—I—T T 6B7A 6BIA 681 WA 28 3A 6 6A1 f` i i _._.J \ i ; ; t 685 683 — 1 t — X�s. i 1 ; 4.— IA 6A 1 _i ! _ _ \ : '.. �� �-- KELLER LY LIMIT 9 9 9 0 D 9A2 9A1A 1 t 3m 30 3A 3 3E 3E1 3B Z i 0 2 39A 9A1r •- x, E 31 .�. 3D2961 P-3 9C, ._. _ -. - iN i �1 i i i i 2C. -- -- c 7C 7 78 IA • •. 6 6D BATE l, D 3 8 4A 4H 4G1 .- •-*- - 78� _ • tAt 1 — T— JOH nM J. FRE ® n 2-9 7.8 k of 2 2.9 < I I j 7 _4- SLR\EY A—GQJ ' Ac ._� .—_.— Ac w A Q' U - - ' - 19 Ac Arc 6 k 9.5'• A c 1 - i! j 2 8 �T t81 t 6 6 BA7D —t.— C Apt• 1 soff m .9 01 1 . I 1 0 pro 18 t8 ;`` i�� 1Ct tt 1 tE 2C5 2C7 ZCl 2CI 2C2 2C3 2C9 7C3 1 ,. 1 1`1 y IBIA IM1�'—"' P 1 1 1 1 nDRENCE 6 8 t ------ I --a� — �! 4 In let IG .3 Ac Isle Qom- SCHOOL 12.8 Ac•s c `•� i i __ -- •,., —.`FMB - 2 18181 1 n • • G _.�—� n 2E ( (13 181A 13 Ac I l� ` 1 1 !✓� 20 k — _—•— 2C14 2C15 201• 1K ! • ZF3 � v_ i ' 2A1 1 A 2A1 V $ I 2C27 ! j 1 2A7 I 2A 2A6 Ten IA1 SA?A 4 W lS 6A 6AI m 4 MIA �0 W 1SW CY A—� . 1 ` M 4Al2 1H1 , i 5 Ac 4E Ul O 5 6C2 10 k 4N q Q 41 sA1 8.4 Ac15.2 SA2 _ Ii4 k ; - 1 I �J 4K u q 0 4 1k. tA3 1A2e mC 6G PIE) 6A 6A1 68 6 6E 6 4A16 48 4C 6 k k 5 Ac 7 i I i' 1 i 1 I IB O- I 18 p� 68 4A16 cr, r. 6G 1 682 018 9.85 k 9 rs A^ F 681AI 6018 015 3617 k tA9 182 of 4A19 gC-3 TRACT MAP 181E f ,^ Rv B 5E'j tnR wl ADJACENT OWNERS AND ZONING Spin Representative #15 I Wayne and June Haney I� I 1 2 1 3 I 4 I 1 I I I I I . I GRAY LANE CR S 1 2 A AIR 3 4 rl[MtA "SF-1 A" LD Tucker AD Gibson W Charles J Holmes m m Y 0 U @ R 4A13A , 171 TNA14A .165 Q 4A17 11 C2 " J Davis W Lee "AG" Ranchland Leasing 2 I B Brumbalow Cc J W Brumbalow J 3 u' J Wilder c¢ ¢ J Brumbalow a "S F-1 A" a M Talaber "AG TR 4E( it „C2„ 1.AG" „AG„ Southlake PSE o R. Travis T Fleeger H Conrad „C2„ I G Hill 8C-4 1 A A . ] TR W SOUTHLAKE BLVD r TR 4A3A TR 4A1A TR 4A4A .06 AC City of Southlake, Texas No: ZA 96-98 Review No: Three Date of Review:10/11/96 -MITym. 11F,hti P.R.T.C.T. O. CiV of Southlake Cbcdhm & Associates 667 N. Carroll Ayenue 1601 E. Lamar Boulevard, Suite 200 Southlake. Texas 76092 265-8532 CITY STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE ABOVE REFERENCED PROJECT RECEIVED BY THE CITY ON 10/07/96 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 DENNI'llIS KILLOUGH AT (817) 48t-5581, EXT. 787. sumanvowww" 1. The following changes are needed with regard to easements: A. Terminate the Common Access Easement, located along the east line of Lot 6R2, at the south line of the 20' UE. B. The common access easement located along the east line of 6R2 does not meet the minimum centerline spacing requirement of 500' from the northeast intersection of Pearson Lane and F.M. 1709. (P & ZACTION 10103196. delete) P & ZACTION. August 15, 1996; Approved (7-0) applicant's request to table until the'September 5, 1996 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting. September. 5, 1996; Approved (7-0) applicant's request to table until the October 3, 1996 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting. October 3, 1996; Approved (6-0), subject to Staff Review Summary No. 2, deleting Item #4C (common access easement located along east line of Lot 6R2 does not meet the minimum centerline spacing requirement). * Original signatures and seals will be required three 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. Mylars will not be accepted if any erasures or original ink, other than signatures or seals, appear on the plat. Denotes Informational Comment 8C-5 co rn rn 0 E— CON R i -` I`_AV jord WSW Avrxm ' 1 rip. rig b 1.1111 : - ll _ws 7N�7g7 145d/L�7rw I a"g 7 „WWNW lvia Y,.O^ ' ��i � I to I ! i q w ' ------------------------ 1:_I_m__o___________ ,10'OLZ io 4- M 1 i UI La 1 1. �EEYJ Z N Nt ow I IM QE im ,•/ice "�j •�tl* Y'1q^ 1 1 1 /y t iD O Li U') �, I 1• ; N 1 N00'21'49W • G e W N� 270 M. .• t to�s1 1 INS r■ . 00.00AN1 W ������-----.....yyyyy,1 I t IrW to w1l I ♦ 1 r •.� YI 1 iy lt'LtL ' I n^ a I 1 e I NN� U, nl M ro's►Z N f21'49'W 1270.00 �v LO =I ILd !6 LOLcn o �I. b 3.00.00AM $ N o 1 N O.hYIS 1 ;; Mon•nO^/�.K.M005 O: n •- �''' � i i t..f 1 to LAW 1 I — J .t9'9►Z i ' i '• O'OLZ I� _ s3WA May 3.6Z,fo.00No — _ _ __ -�. a31ie trsTi-encwl = s+aaw n uaor - av iu' Qs f S b City of Southlake, Texas MEMORANDUM October 11, 1996 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Ron Harper, City Engineer SUBJECT: Developer Agreement for Timarron, Village "F", Phase 1, being south of E. Southlake Blvd. and being north of and adjacent to Timarron Addition, Brenwyck, Phase 2 BACKGROUND Attached is the Developer Agreement for Timarron, Village "F", Phase 1. This phase of Village "F" consists of forty-four (44) lots. The usual conditions for the cash escrow, letters of credit, performance bond or payment bond are included in this agreement. There are a few changes and conditions that need to be addressed. Page 5, GENERAL REQUIREMENTS, Paragraph G, Sections la and lb: As part of the land transaction between the City and Timarron for the municipal complex on F.M. 1709, the City agreed to waive fees, including the 2% administrative and 3% inspection fees for future Timarron projects, up to a total of $350,400. The Developer wishes to keep references to the fees in the Developer Agreement; however, the actual fee amounts may be applied against accrued fee credits. Page 6, FACILITIES, Paragraph B, DRAINAGE This section has not been changed as requested by Councihnember Harris. Staff currently insures that access to all drainage easements is provided, and further the access requirement is covered in the Drainage Ordinance. Staff has consulted with Councilmember Harris and he has agreed to leave the language as is. • Pages 9 and 10, GENERAL PROVISIONS, Paragraph A, INDEMNIFICATION This section has been modified to reflect the concerns of Councilmember Harris. Page 12, OTHER ISSUES, Paragraph A, PARK FEES The Developer met with the Park Board on September 9, 1996 to discuss recommended credits for this project and Village "I". The Park Board agreed to recommend 10% credit for the construction of the neighborhood center in Village "F" ($2,200). This would result in a total Park Fee of $19,800. (The Developer was scheduled to meet with the Park Board on October 14, 1996 to discuss further credits on this project. Kim Lenoir will be available to discuss the outcome of this meeting.) 10A-1 MEMORANDUM CURTIS E. HAWK TIMARRON, VILLAGE "F", PHASE 1 OCTOBER 11, 1996 PAGE 2 RECOMMENDATION Staff's recommendation is to place the Timarron, Village "F", Phase 1, Developer Agreement on egular City Council Meeting Agenda for October 15, 1996, for City Council consideration. attachment: Developer Agreement . Memorandum from Kim Lenoir, Director of Parks & Rec Plat Exhibit C:\W PWIN60\W PDOCS\SUBDMTUtARROMV IL4FlPHASEI\DEV-AGP-MEIA M 10A-2 TIMARRON VILLAGE "F", PHASE 1 10/15/96 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 Timarron, Village " % Phase 1, 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 forty-four (44) lots contained within the Tinarron 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, eight (8), after installation of the water and sewer mains. Framing shall not commence until water quality is approved by the City and all appropriate Fire Code requirements are satisfied, and street signs with street names are in place. Temporary all-weather metal signs securely fastened in the ground are acceptable until permanent street signs are installed. The Developer recognizes that the remaining building permits or Certificates of Occupancy for residential dwellings will not be issued until the supporting public works infrastructure including permanent street signs with block numbers and regulatory signs within the Addition have been accepted by the City. This will serve as an incentive to the Developer to see that all remaining items are completed. 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. 1 OA-3 The value of the performance bond, letters of credit or cash escrow will reduce at a rate consistent with the amount of work that has been completed by the Developer and accepted by the City. Each request for reduction or payment of escrow funds must be accompanied by lien release(s) executed by all subcontractors and/or suppliers prior to the release of escrow funds or reduction in value of the account. Performance and payment bond, letters of credit or cash escrow from the prime contractor(s) or other entity reasonably acceptable to City, hereinafter referred to as Co,litractor, 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. If the Developer chooses to construct bar ditches in lieu of curb and gutter, and the City approves the design and grade of bar ditches, Developer understands and agrees to provide maintenance on the bar ditches for a period of two years from the date of acceptance of the Addition. Maintenance includes trash and debris cleanup, mowing, and erosion control. 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 acknowledgment that all facilities are complete, have been inspected and approved and are being accepted by the City. G. On all public facilities included in this agreement for which Developer awards his own construction contract, Developer agrees to the following procedure: Developer agrees to pay the following: 10A-4 a. Inspection fees equal to three percent (3%) of the cost of the water, street, drainage and sanitary sewer facilities, on all facilities included in this agreement for which Developer awards his or her own construction contract, to be paid prior to construction of each phase and based on actual bid construction cost; b. Administrative Processing Fee equal to two percent (2%) of the cost of water, street, drainage and sanitary sewer facilities, on all facilities included in this Agreement for which Developer awards his or her own construction contract, to be paid prior to construction of each phase and based on actual bid construction cost; C. Trench testing (95% Standard); d. The additional charge for inspections during Saturday, Sunday, holidays, and after normal working hours; e. Any charges for 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. 10A-5 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. 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 released by the City. Further, the Developer agrees to complete this installation in accordance with Ordinance No. 170 and shall be responsible for all construction costs, materials and engineering. In the event that certain water lines are to be oversized because of City requirements, the City will reimburse the Developer for the oversize cost greater than the cost of an 8" line. Additionally, the City agrees to provide temporary water service at Developer's request and expense, for construction, testing and irrigation purposes only, to individual lots during the construction of homes, even though sanitary sewer service may not be available to the homes. B. DRAINAGE: Developer hereby agrees to; construct the necessary drainage facilities within the Addition. These facilities shall be in accordance with the plans and specificationsto be prepared by Developer's engineers, released. 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. The Developer hereby agrees to complywith all provisions of the Texas Water Code. I OA-6 C. LAW COMPLIANCE: Developer hereby agrees to comply with all federal, state, and local laws that are applicable to development of this Addition. D. 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 released 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 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. 10A-7 E. ON -SITE SANITARY SEWER FACILITIES: The Developer hereby agrees to install sanitary sewerage collection facilities to service lots as shown on the final plat of the Addition. Sanitary sewer facilities will be installed in accordance with the plans and specifications to be prepared by the Developer's engineer and released by the City. Further, the Developer agrees to complete this installation in compliance with all applicable city ordinances, regulations and codes and shall be responsible for all construction costs, materials and engineering. F. EROSION CONTROL: During construction of the Addition and after the streets have been installed, the Developer agrees to keep the streets free from soil build-up. The Developer agrees to use soil control measures such as hay bales, silt screening, hydromulch, etc., to prevent, soil erosion. It will be the Developer's responsibility to present to the Director of Public Works a soil control development plan that will be implemented for this 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. G. 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. H. USE OF PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY: It is understood by and between the City and Developer that the Developer may provide unique amenities within public right-of-way, such as landscaping, irrigation, lighting, etc., for the enhancement of the Addition. The Developer agrees to maintain these amenities until such responsibility is turned over to a homeowners association. The Developer and his successors and assigns understand that the City shall not be responsible for the replacement of these amenities under any I OA-8 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. I. START OF CONSTRUCTION: Before the construction of the streets, and the water, sewer, or drainage facilities can begin, the following must take place: 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. Developer or contractor shall furnish to the City a list of all subcontractors and suppliers, which will be providing greater than a $1,000 value to the Addition. III. GENERAL PROVISIONS: A. INDEMNIFICATION DEVELOPER COVENANTS AND AGREES TO INDEMNIFY AND DOES HEREBY INDEMNIFY, HOLD HARMLESS AND DEFEND CITY, ITS OFFICERS, AGENTS, SERVANTS AND EMPLOYEES, FROM AND AGAINST ANY AND ALL CLAIMS OR SUITS FOR PROPERTY DAMAGE OR LOSS AND/OR PERSONAL INJURY, INCLUDING DEATH, TO ANY AND ALL PERSONS, OF WHATSOEVER KIND OR CHARACTER, WHETHER REAL OR ASSERTED, (INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, REASONABLE FEES AND EXPENSES OF ATTORNEYS, EXPERT WITNESSES AND OTHER CONSULTANTS), ARISING OUT OF f[17MA OR IN CONNECTION WITH, DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY, THE CONSTRUCTION, MAINTENANCE, OCCUPYANCY, USE EXISTENCE OR LOCATION OF SAID IMPROVEMENT OR IMPROVEMENTS, AND SHALL FURTHER BE LIABLE FOR INJURY OR DAMAGE TO CITY PROPERTY, ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH ANY ALL ACTS OR OMISSIONS OF DEVELOPER, ITS OFFICERS, AGENTS, SERVANTS, EMPLOYEES, CONTRACTORS, SUBCONTRACTORS, LICENSEES, INVITEES, OR TRESPASSERS. DEVELOPER AGREES TO INDEMNIFY THE CITY, ITS OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES FOR ANY DAMAGES, CLAIMS OR LIABILITIES ARISING FROM THE NEGLIGENT ACT OR OMISSION, OR OF THE CONCURRENT NEGLIGENT ACT OR OMISSION, OF THE CITY, ITS OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES. B. Venue of any action brought hereunder shall be in Fort Worth, Tarrant County, Texas. 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 art assumption of such responsibility and liability by the City for any defect in the design and specifications prepared by the consulting engineer, his officers, agents, servants or employees, it being the intent of the parties that approval by the City Engineer signifies the City's approval on only the general design concept of the improvements to be constructed. In this connection, the Developer shall for a period of two (2) years after the acceptance by the City of Southlake of the completed construction project, indemnify and hold harmless the City, its officers, agents, .servants and employees, from any loss, damage, liability or expense on account of damage to property and injuries, including death, to any and all persons which may arise out of any defect, deficiency or negligence of the engineer's designs and specifications incorporated into any improvements constructed in accordance therewith, and the Developer shall defend at his own expense any 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. 10A-10 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 acknowledgment 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 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 AND/OR SEWER PRO-RATA: There is no off -site and/or sewer pro rata, off -site drainage structures, or off -site water. 10A-11 B. PARK FEES: The Park Fees for this addition is $22,000 (44 lots x $500). The Developer shall receive 10% credit toward Park Fees in the amount of $2,200 for proposed and previously installed improved open spaces; resulting in total Park Fees of $19,800. The Developer shall be allowed to carry over credit for future phases of Timarron. C. PERIMETER STREET ORDINANCE: There is no Perimeter Street Fee required for Timarron Village "I", Phase 1. D. TREE PRESERVATION ORDINANCE: All construction activities shall meet the requirements of the Tree Preservation Ordinance No. 585. SIGNED AND EFFECTIVE on the date last set forth below. CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS CA Rick Stacy, Mayor DEVELOPER: By: Title: Address Date: 10A-12 ATTEST: Sandra LeGrand, City Secretary Date: I OA-13 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 maybe 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. C.XWPWI)IMWPDMSISUEDMTU""OMVILL-F\PHASEIIDEV-AGR. WPD fflYMR:7 Loiry or SouiniaKe, 1 exas MEMORANDUM September 12, 1996 TO: Bob Whitehead, Director of Public Works FROM: Kim Lenoir, Director of Parks and Recreation SUBJECT: Park Dedication Credits - Timarron Village I & F The Parks and Recreation Board reviewed the development plans for Timarron Village I & F, on September 9, 1996. The Board recommended that the City credit Timarron park dedication fees dollar for dollar for the public trail construction on Continental Blvd and Byron Nelson Parkway. The Board voted that the Neighborhood Center No.2, 3.5 acres in Village F should be allowed 10 % credit. The Board compared the proposed Neighborhood Center with the Southlake Parks, Recreation and Open Space Master Plan requirements for neighborhood zone number 6. The master plan showed that of the proposed facilities for the center only the multi -purpose play field was a remaining need in this neighborhood zone. The Board expressed that the developer had the right to build more than was required by the master plan but for the developer to receive 50% credit for building more than required was not justified. Carol Lee Hamilton will be present at the City Council work session on September 17 to answer any questions about the Board's recommendation or City Council members may call her before the meeting. The Board motion was to allow 100 % credit for the public trail construction on Continental Blvd and Byron Nelson Parkway and 10 % credit for Neighborhood Center Number 2. The motion was approved (4-2), those voting "aye" were Carol Lee Hamilton, Vicki Johnson, Robin Jones and Sherry Berman, those voting "nay" were Larry Goldstein and Ronnie Kendall. Members absent from the meeting were Gary Beyer, Bethann Scratchard and Rod Johnson. Following matrix outlines fees assessed and credits recommended. 10A-15 Summary of credits considered by the Park Board: FEE DUE CITY: $128,500 assessment-73,322 credits = $55,178 fee due City *New developments for the Park Board to consider **Carry over from previous developments needed to calculate fees due Call me if you have any questions at 481-5581 ext 757. A�- KML IOA-16 30VIIIA : NOWGGV N088VNIi 1Vld, VNIJ sF�•� 2r" s I Ql�fl 2�i$��� •� •� t r gg TI c � l5 All, fi ! rig ! if Ilr•� � � ek�k -°@� � Q . �9e If • is f f eQ$ Q 11 !� t e5. ;.! `l� Q t;te�g Y #gyp :#; grdgg8 ie°f ;i ►.A wa :� gg ply li pfs. `# xiITSg .► s Tfi elr-3 fi ! liiC °ff� Ytlsp4�c Q`Qf�^ �s �e�.:.sYssessy "I p N. lCe hil 9.1 fEb�il IN F, isms, la"! it o 401W ni s t s � ' A Z g p ? 5s o1 fill • ■ r LL �qj ¢ to Q2 '03,0 VuzAHM F C> mW r .8 Q fill i q : Y �gxi9 �l Y� � � !� •3 b k#.% t # I R = E# 4 l f l3i� :ii?i8s`fe10!e±All �roosessssbbb`rrbb'cb l;aasaa:aal5 10A-17il:er���o: City of Southlake, Texas MEMORANDUM October 11, 1996 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Ron Harper, City Engineer SUBJECT: Commercial Developer Agreement for Georgetown Park Addition, Lot 1, being south of E. Southlake Blvd. and 700' east of the intersection of S. Kimball Ave. and E. Southlake Blvd. BACKGROUND Attached is the Developer Agreement for Georgetown Park Addition, Lot 1, being south of E. Southlake Blvd. and 700' east of the intersection of S. Kimball Ave. and E. Southlake Blvd. This project consists of office buildings. There are no changes to the standard Developer Agreement. In order to not unduly delay this project, a building permit has been issued to allow for the start of pad construction. The Developer was unaware that a Developer Agreement was required for this project. RECOMMENDATION Staff's recommendation is to place the Georgetown Park Addition, Lot 1, Developer Agreement on the Regular City Council Meeting Agenda for October 15, 1996, for City Council attachment: Developer Agreement Plat Exhibit C:\W PWIN6OkWPDOCSCOMMPRCIkGEORC;LkDEV•AGR.MFM 10B-1 GEORGETOWN'PARK ADDITION, LOT 1 COMMERCIAL DEVELOPERS AGREEMENT 10/15/96 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 Georgetown Park Addition, Lot 1, to the City of Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas, for the installation of certain community facilities located therein, and to provide city services thereto. It is understood by and between the parties that this Agreement is applicable to Georgetown.Yark Addition;:- Lot 1, (a commercial development) and to the off -site improvements necessary to support the subdivision. 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. The Developer will present to the City either a cash escrow, Letter 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 public facilities to be constructed by the Developer, and providing for payment to the City of such amounts, up to the total remaining amounts required for the completion of the subdivision if the Developer fails to complete the work within two (2) years of the signing of this agreement between the City and Developer. All bonds should be approved by a Best -rated bonding company. All letters of credit must meet the Requirements for Irrevocable Letter of Credit attached hereto and incorporated herein. The value of the performance bond, letter of credit or cash escrow will reduce at a rate consistent with the amount of work that has been completed by the Developer and accepted by the City. Performance and payment bond, letter of credit or cash escrow from the prime contractor(s) or other entity reasonably acceptable to City, hereinafter referred to as Contractor, will be acceptable in lieu of Developer's obligations specified above. C. The Developer agrees to furnish to the City maintenance bonds, letter of credit or cash escrow amounting to 20 % of the cost of construction of underground public utilities and 50% for the paving. These maintenance bonds, letter of credit or cash escrow will be for a period of two (2) years and will be issued prior to the final City acceptance of the subdivision. The maintenance bonds, letter of credit or cash escrow will be supplied to the City by the contractors performing the work, and the City will be named as the beneficiary if the contractors fail to perform any required maintenance. 10B-2 D. It is further agreed and understood by the parties hereto that upon acceptance by City, title to all facilities and improvements mentioned hereinabove, which are intended to be public facilities, shall be vested in the City of Southlake and Developer hereby relinquishes any right, title, or interest in and to said facilities or any part thereof. It is further understood and agreed that until the City accepts such improvements, City shall have no liability or responsibility in connection with any such facilities. Acceptance of the facilities for this provision and for the entire agreement shall occur at such time that City, through its City Manager or his duly appointed representative, provides Developer with a written acknowledgement that all facilities are complete, have been inspected and approved and are being accepted by the City. F. On all public facilities included in this agreement for which Developer awards his own construction contract, the Developer agrees to the following procedure: 1. To pay to the City three (3 %) percent of the construction cost for inspection fees of the public water, streets, drainage facilities, and sanitary sewer. 2. To pay to the City two (2%) percent of the construction cost for Administrative Processing Fee for public water, streets, drainage facilities, and sanitary sewer. It is agreed by both the City and the Developer that the City will pay the following testing fees and the Developer will be responsible to pay for all other testing fees required by the City not listed below: a) All nuclear density tests on the roadway subgrade (95 % Standard). Trench testing (95 % Standard) shall be paid by the Developer; b) All gradation tests required to insure proper cement and/or lime stabilization; c) Technicians time for preparing concrete cylinders; d) Concrete cylinder tests and concrete coring samples. Charges for retesting as a result of failed tests will be paid by the Developer. Fees are payable prior to construction of each phase, based on actual bid construction costs. The Developer will be responsible to pay for all inspection fees when inspection is required on Saturday or Sunday. These fees are considered over and above the 3 % inspection fee as stated above. Acceptance of the project will not be given until all inspection fees are paid. ,*-W1 3. To delay connection of buildings to service lines or water mains constructed under this contract until said water mains and service lines have been completed to the satisfaction of and accepted by the City. G. The Developer will be responsible for mowing all grass and weeds and otherwise reasonably maintaining the aesthetics of all land and lots in said subdivision which have not been sold to third parties. After fifteen (15) days written notice, should the Developer fail in this responsibility, the City may contract for this service and bill the Developer for reasonable costs. Such amount shall become a lien upon all real property of the subdivision so maintained by the City, and not previously conveyed to other third parties, 120 days after Developer has notice of costs. H. 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. I. 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. J. The Developer agrees to fully comply with the terms and conditions of all other applicable development regulations and ordinances of the City of Southlake. K. The Developer agrees that the completed project will be constructed in conformance with the Development Site Plan, Construction Plans and other permits or regulatory authorizations granted by the City during the development review process. II. FACILITIES: A. ON SITE WATER: The Developer hereby agrees to install water facilities to service lots as shown on the final plat of the Georgetown Park Addition, Lot 1, to the City of Southlake. Water facilities will be installed in accordance with plans and specifications to be prepared by the Developer's engineer and released by the City. Further, the Developer agrees to complete this installation in accordance with Ordinance No. 170 and shall be responsible for all construction costs, materials and engineering. 10B-4 In the event that certain water lines are to be oversized because of City of Southlake requirements, the City will reimburse the Developer for the oversize cost greater than the cost of an 8" line. Additionally, the City agrees to provide temporary water service at Developer's request and expense, for construction, testing and irrigation purposes only, to individual lots during the construction of buildings, even though sanitary sewer service may not be available to the buildings. B. DRAINAGE: Developer hereby agrees to construct the necessary drainage facilities within the addition. These facilities shall be in accordance with the plans and specifications to be prepared by Developer's engineers, released by the City Engineer, the City, and made part of the final plat as approved by the City Council. The developer hereby agrees to fully comply with all EPA requirements relating to the planning, permitting and management of storm water which may be in force at the time that development proposals are being presented for approval by the City. C. STREETS: (If applicable) .. :- - ::- r. 10• .. .: I P.M. :1111UPPOINFRI --: -: vote 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 Georgetown Park Addition, Lot 1, to the City of Soutlilake. Sanitary sewer facilities will be installed in accordance with the plans and specifications to be prepared by the Developer's engineer and released by the City. Further, the Developer agrees to complete this installation in compliance with all applicable city ordinances, regulations and codes and shall be responsible for all construction costs, materials and engineering. E. EROSION CONTROL: During construction of the subdivision and after the streets have been installed, the Developer agrees to keep the streets free from soil build-up. The Developer agrees to use soil control measures such as hay bales, silt screening, hydromulch, etc., to prevent soil erosion. It will be the Developer's responsibility to present to the Director of Public Works a soil control development plan that will be implemented for this 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 affected areas. If the Developer does not remove the soil within 72 hours, the City may cause the soil to be removed either by contract or City forces and place the soil within the subdivision at the contractor's expense. All fees owed to the City will be collected prior to acceptance of the subdivision. F. AMENITIES: It understood by and between the City and Developer that the Georgetown Park Addition, Lot 1, 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 items such as walls, vegetation, signage, landscaping, street furniture, pond and lake improvements until such responsibility is turned over to a homeowners association. 1 G. USE OF PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY: It is understood by and between the City and Developer that the Developer may provide unique amenities within public right-of-way, such as landscaping, irrigation, lighting, etc., for the enhancement of the addition. The Developer agrees to maintain these amenities until such responsibility is turned over to a homeowners association. The Developer understands that the City shall not be responsible for the replacement of these amenities under any circumstances and further agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the City from any and all damages, loss or liability of any kind whatsoever by reason of injury to property or third person occasioned by its use of the public right-of-way with regard to these improvements and the Developer shall, at his own cost and expense, defend and protect City against all such claims and demands. H. START OF CONSTRUCTION: Before the construction of the water, sewer, streets or drainage facilities can begin, the following must take place: 1. Approved payment and performance bonds submitted to the City in the name of the City prior to the commencement of any work. 2. At least five (5) sets of construction plans stamped "Released for Construction" by the City Engineer. 3. All fees required by the City to be paid to the City. 4. The Developer, or Contractor shall furnish to the City a policy of general liability insurance. III. GENERAL PROVISIONS: A. INDEMNIFICATION DEVELOPER COVENANTS AND AGREES TO INDEMNIFY AND DOES HEREBYINDEMNIFY, HOLD HARMLESS ;AND DEFEND CITY, ITS OFFICERS, AGENTS, SERVANTS' AND EMPLOYEES, FROM AND AGAINST ANY AND ALL CLAIMS OR SUITS FOR PROPERTY DAMAGE OR LOSS AND/OR PERSONAL INJURY, INCLUDING DEATH, TO ANY AND ALL PERSONS, OF WHATSOEVER KIND OR CHARACTER, WHETHER REAL OR ASSERTED, (INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, REASONABLE FEES AND EXPENSES OF ATTORNEYS, EXPERT WITNESSES AND OTHER CONSULTANTS), ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH, DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY, THE CONSTRUCTION, MAINTENANCE, OCCUPYANCY, USE EXISTENCE OR LOCATION OF SAID ;'IMPROVEMENT OR IMPROVEMENTS, AND .� SHALL FURTHER BE LIABLE FOR INJURY OR DAMAGE TO CITY PROPERTY, ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH ANY ALL ACTS OR OMISSIONS OF DEVELOPER, ITS OFFICERS, AGENTS, SERVANTS, EMPLOYEES, CONTRACTORS, SUBCONTRACTORS, LICENSEES, INVITEES, OR TRESPASSERS. DEVELOPER AGREES TO INDEMNIFY THE CITY, ITS OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES FOR ANY DAMAGES, CLAIMS OR LIABILITIES ARISING FROM THE NEGLIGENT ACT OR OMISSION, OR OF THE CONCURRENT NEGLIGENT ACT OR OMISSION, OF THE CITY,ITS OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES. B. Venue of any action brought hereunder shall be in Fort Worth, Tarrant County, Texas. C. Approval by the City Engineer or other City employee of any plans, designs or specifications submitted by the Developer pursuant to this agreement shall not constitute or be deemed to be a release of the responsibility and liability of the Developer, his engineer, employees, officers or agents for the accuracy and competency of their design and specifications. Such approval shall not be deemed to be an assumption of such responsibility and liability by the City for any defect in the design and specifications prepared by the consulting engineer, his officers, agents, servants or employees, it being the intent of the parties that approval by the City Engineer signifies the City's approval on only the general design concept of the improvements to be constructed. In this connection, the Developer shall for a period of two (2) years after the acceptance by the City of Southlake of the completed construction project, indemnify and hold harmless the City, its officers, agents, servants and employees, from any loss, damage, liability or expense on account of damage to property and injuries, including death, to any and all persons which may arise out of any defect, deficiency or negligence of the engineer's designs and specifications incorporated into any improvements constructed in accordance therewith, and the Developer shall defend at his own expense any suits or other proceedings bought against the City, its officers, agents, servants or employees, or any of them, on account thereof, to pay all expenses and satisfy all judgements which may be incurred by or rendered against them or any of them in connection with herewith. D. This agreement or any part thereof or any interest herein, shall not be assigned by the Developer without the express written consent of the City Manager, which shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. E. On all facilities included in this agreement for which the Developer awards his own construction contract, the Developer agrees to employ a construction contractor who is approved by the City, and whose approval shall not be unreasonably 10B-8 withheld or delayed, said contractor to meet City and statutory requirements for being insured, licensed and bonded to do work in public projects and to be qualified in all respects to bid on public projects and to be qualified in all respects to bid on public projects of a similar nature. In addition, the Developer, or Contractor shall furnish the payment and performance bonds in the name of the City prior to the commencement of any work hereunder and shall also furnish to the City a policy of general liability insurance. F. Work performed under the agreement shall be completed within two (2) years from the date thereof. In the event the work is not completed within the two (2) year period, the City may, at its election, draw down on the performance bond, letter of credit or other security provided by Developer and complete such work at Developer's expense; provided, however, that 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. IV. OTHER ISSUES: A. PARK FEES: The developer agrees to pay the Park Fee Georgetown Park Addition, Lot 1, of $500 per acre, in accordance with the Subdivision Ordinance No. 483, Section 7.0. There are approximately 3.058-acres in Georgetown Park which would bring the total cost of Park Fee to $1,529.00. SIGNED AND EFFECTIVE on the date last set forth below. DEVELOPER: Georgetown Monticello Partners. Ltd. By: (Thomas J. Wouters) Title: Vice President of General Partner Address: 210 Park Blvd., Suite 100 Date: Grapevine, Texas 76051 10B-9 CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS :A Rick Stacy, Mayor ATTEST: Sandra LeGrand, City Secretary Date: 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. c: I wpfiles I devagree I cmercial IOB-11 Al Ft t ! Mi dE.f 1„ t J.Ydl];:t 1" • pJ R3�i UD a g oa�y ly�u WW6Y U I i1F• �� „� —.a-ar — — a "< < z z v �a " � < Uw rye �F.Fi�<g owl A ,.304eV2i<Mom < O q < ~ I a 04 p so E. O F y U s g-^ rn. .sNr. Ins 3 CZA0.00 N ! Rk p' o I � � I V:^ g 1 r W�� t Pew I.F 3 ge QQ(t ,I 1e IOB-12 It z 0 aE op'p_ o ' Ud ��1 a;�d•s �S F otxF a• • F a m at `i City of Southlake, Texas MEMORANDUM October 10, 1996 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Lou Ann Heath, Director of Finance SUBJECT: FY1996-97 Budget Items Relating to Issuance of FY1996-97 Contract Obligations and Certificates of Obligation At the October 1 City Council meeting, the Council authorized proceeding with certain equipment expenditures for Public Safety and Public Works. The specific Public Safety equipment items were outlined in the September 18 memo from Director Campbell. The Public Works equipment for GIS, Building Inspection, and the Street Division was discussed in two memos dated September 25 from City Engineer Ron Harper. There are a number of additional equipment items that are in the FY1996-97 budget to be funded through issuance of Contract Obligations. These Obligations will be issued in the early part of 1997 together with the amounts approved for the FY1996-97 Capital Projects budget. There are also other expenditures that were identified by the Council for separate consideration, and were listed as Exhibit "B" in the adopted FY1996-97 Budget. In order to move forward with the FY1996-97 Budget, staff needs direction on these equipment items from the Council. Attached to this memo are the following schedules: 1. Items Funded Through Contract Obligations 2. Exhibit `B"; FY1996-97 New Expenditure Requests to be Considered for Deletion from General Fund Expenditures 3. Memorandum from Kim Lenoir dated September 26 4. Letter from Southlake Girls Softball Association dated May 2 5. Memorandum from Kim Lenoir dated May 17 in response to Southlake Girls Softball Association letter 6. Memorandum from Billy Campbell dated September 18, Capital Purchasing (approved by City Council October 1) 7. Memorandum from Ron Harper dated September 25, GIS and Engineering Computer Expenditures (approved by City Council October 1) 8. Memorandum from Ron Harper dated September 25, Building Inspection and Street Department Expenditures (approved by City Council October 1) 9. FY1996-97 Capital Projects Summary /D4f-1 Curtis E. Hawk FY1996-97 Budget Items October 10, 1996 page 2 The FY1996-97 Adopted Budget included a Capital Projects component funded partially through issuance of debt. Attached is the FY1996-97 Capital Projects Summary, listing the Water/Sewer, Streets and Drainage, and Parks projects which total $17.9 million. These projects will be initiated during the year, and will likely carry over into the subsequent fiscal year as well. The Capital Projects debt will be issued in the early part of 1997, together with amounts for the equipment in the Operating Budget. As the City proceeds with the Capital Projects program for the year, there may be additional projects that will need to be considered, or projects to be delayed or deleted due to various reasons. Staff will make a recommendation to the Council on the level of debt funding for Capital Projects. The City's financial advisor, First Southwest Company, will work with the Finance and Public Works Directors and City Manager's office to coordinate the timing and structure of the debt. The required legal and procedural items will be brought forward to the Council in the appropriate sequence to make sure the City receives funding in a timely manner. ON t E)GHBIT "A" ITEMS FUNDED THROUGH CONTRACT OBLIGATIONS GENERAL FUND 100-GENERAL GOVERNMENT 100-City Secretary/Mayor/ City Council Printer' TOTAL 1,299 0 0 1,299 103-City Managees Office 1 T Color Monitor for PIO' 700 0 0 700 Laser Color Printer for PIO' 4,000 0 0 4,000 Personal Computer for City Manager' Z= Q Q 2= TOTAL 6,700 0 0 6,700 105-Support Services Telephone system -Public Works facility' 20,000 0 0 20,000 LCD display and presentation equip' 12,000 0 0 12,000 Network Server-Admin bktg' 5,000 0 0 5,000 Network link/equonent-Admin bldg- 15,000 0 .0 15,000 Public Works network equipment' 10,700 0 0 10,700 Parks network equipment' 16-450 Q Q 16.450 TOTAL 79,150 0 0 79,150 106-FINANCE 106-Finance Two computers for Payroll & Accounts Payable' 4,800 0 0 4,800 Laser jet printer for Finance Department' 2-9M Q Q 23M TOTAL 7,750 0 0 7,750 107-Municipal Court Laptop Computer' 2.= Q Q Z= QTOTAL 2,800 0 0 2,800 PUBLIC SAFETY 131-Fire Services Self Contained Breathing Apparatus' 69,478 0 0 69,478 Opticoms' 34,975 0 0 34,975 Vehicles' 78,010 0 0 78,010 Cameras' 18,000 0 0 18,000 Infra -red detector' 18,000 0 0 18,000 Public Safety House' 25.000 Q Q 25.000 TOTAL 243,463 0 0 243,463 132-Police Services Police Vehicles' 251,375 0 0 251.375 Personal Data Terminals for Traffic and CID (2)' 12,000 Q Q 12,000 TOTAL 263,375 0 0 263,375 133-Public Safety Support Two Towers and Three Laptops' 12-000 Q Q 12-000 TOTAL 12,000 0 0 12,000 140-PUBLIC WORKS 142-Building Inspections One Truck' 23,500 0 0 23,500 Two Computers' 4.000 Q Q 4.000 TOTAL 27,500 0 0 27,500 144-Streets and Drainage 6-7 Yard Dump Truck' 40,000 0 0 40,000 20 Trailer' 7,500 0 0 7,500 Asphalt lay -down machine' 35,000 0 0 35,000 Paint Striping Machine' 4.000 Q Q 4,QQQ TOTAL 86,500 0 0 86,500 (60, Page 18 /D e-.3 t r EXHIBIT "A" ITEMS FUNDED THROUGH CONTRACT OBLIGATIONS 146-Public Works Admin. Computers' 7.200 0 0 7,200 Laptop Computers' 6,000 0 0 6,000 Printer* 1,600 0 0 1,600 GPS Mapping System and Services' 6,000 0 0 6,000 Scanner' 16,000 0 0 16,000 Color Printer' 1,900 0 0 1,900 Disk Space' 1,600 0 0 1.600 Memory Upgrade Sun Work Station* 3,200 0 0 3,200 Memory Upgrade Plotter' 300 0 0 300 Automobile' 15-000 Q Q 15.000 TOTAL 58,800 0 0 58,800 145-PARKS AND RECREATION 145-Parks and Recreation Cash Register' 4,250 0 0 4,250 Computer Hub' 5.500 0 0 5,5W Computer-Admin. Asst• 2.900 0 0 2,900 Large Stage' 25,000 0 0 25.000 Van* 34,000 0 0 34.000 Field Rake' 8,311 0 0 8,311 Walk behind reel mower' 5.048 0 0 5,046 Full size 3/4 ton Pick Up' 20,000 0 0 20,000 Computer- Maint. Shop' 2,900 0 0 2,900 62" Flail mower' 14.500 Q Q 14.500 TOTAL 122,407 0 0 122,407 GRAND TOTAL GENERAL FUND 911,744 0 0 911.744 Page 19 L ` EXHIBIT "B" CITY OF SOUTHLAKE FY1996-97 PROPOSED BUDGET New Expenditure Requests to be Deleted from General Fund in order to reduce tax rate 1 cent (from $.422/$100 to $.412/$100) Item Total City Secretary/Mayor/Council File cabinets $5,588 $0 $0 $5,588 Supplies -recycling $2,500 $0 $2,500 $0 Streets/Drainage Street/drainage worker $10,538 $10,538 $0 $0 Parks/Recreation Fencing-ballfields $42,213 $0 $0 $42,213 All Terrain vehicle $6,200 $0 $0 $6,200 48" walk behind mower $3,450 $0 $0 $3,450 Video Camera $1,600 $0 $0 $1,600 Slide Projector $1,500 $0 $0 $1,500 Tent $5,000 $0 $0 $5,000 Recreation Specialist $12,134 $11,734 $400 $0 Landscape Administrator $15.513 $14,913 $600 $0 Administrative Secretary $16.533 $13,633 $0 $2,900 Public Works Administration Conference table $800 $0 $0 $800 Flat Files $2,000 $0 $0 $2,000 r -mmunity Development Filing Fees $2,500 $0 $2,500 $0 TOTAL $128,069 $50,818 $6,000 $71,251 1 Page 3 8 i C EXHIBIT "B" CITY OF SOUTHLAKE FY1996-97 PROPOSED BUDGET Continuation Budget Requests to be Deleted from General Fund in order to reduce tax rate an additional 1 cent (from $.412/$100 to $.402/$100) Division mom Amount Personnel Operations Capital City Secretary/Mayor/Council Delay ordinance codification $10,000 $0 $10,000 $0 Human Resources Pre -employment physical $375 $0 $375 $0 Tuition reimbursement $500 $0 $500 $0 Building Inspection Demolition $30.000 $0 $30,000 $0 Parks/Recreation Professional services - database development $11,000 Public Works Administration Drainage master plan - phase II engineering services $100,000 TOTAL $151,875 2 lop —GO $0 $11.000 $0 $100,000 $0 $151,875 Page 39 $0 $0 $0 City of Southlake, Texas ME-110RAND UN1 September 26. 1996 TO: Lou Ann Heath. Director of Finance FROM: Kim Lenoir, Director of Parks and Recreation RE: Budget FY 1996-97 Requests The details of the capital items budgeted for the Parks and Recreation Department are summarized below: Cash Register / Computer Hub / Computers / Database Development. The volume of funds and registrations that we are handling and tracking by hand has increased too much to continue. The staff time in tracking class participants, fees, refunds and payment to contractors has grown so much that the manual system is not effective and too time consuming. We handle several thousand dollars a day without a cash register or the ability to give change. A cash register networked to a computerized registration system is needed to assist the public promptly and have access to all the information needed. Networking of all of our department functions and to network with the other City departments is the most effective and efficient use of staff time. Specifically, the database development is needed to automate program registration, reservations, and create a user database. We are projecting over 20,000 users, 300 classes, income of over $200,000 in 1997 and an automated system needs to be in place to speed the processing and increase the accuracy. Currently the administrative clerk and recreation supervisor are manually recording class, times, reservations, refunds, changes, cancellations, etc. which is time consuming and leaves room for errors. Ballfreld Fences Replaced at Bicentennial Park. This is a joint -use project with CISD. The CISD varsity, junior varsity and freshman softball teams will be playing on the Bicentennial Park fields for at least two years beginning January 1997. Coach Ledbetter has stated that the field must meet UIL requirements. To make the fields regulation size, fences need to be moved and the backstop increased in height from 10 feet to 20 feet. As you can see in a letter from the Southlake Girls Softball Association last year, the fences currently in place are in need of replacement. The fences on Field 41 have served their life span (8 to 10 years) and replacement is more efficient than repair costs. If we simply repair the fences, the field will not meet UIL requirements. This budget item also includes replacing the sideline fences on Fields #2 and #3. Again the fences have served their expected life span (8 to 10 years) and replacement is more efficient than repair costs. The outfield fence on Field #3 and part of Field #2 was replaced during construction of Phase I of Bicentennial Park to make room for the new maintenance building. All of the replacement fencing will be with heavier gauge posts, rail and fabric (9 gauge) like the new park construction, with a life expectancy of 15 to 20 years. If approved, all ballfreld fences at Bicentennial Park will be safe and will meet all foreseeable needs for the future. 10C- 7 MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT NEEDS All Terrain Utility Vehicle. This equipment allows the staff greater flexibility to work within the 50 acre Bicentennial Park. The department purchased one of these last year and have found it to be invaluable for transporting supplies, equipment and manpower from the nine ballfields, eight soccer Fields. and five buildings across the 50 acre park. This item is needed to replace the currently used 1987 S-10 Chevy small truck that has 80,343 miles which is regularly in the shop for repair. 48" Walk Behind Mower. This mower is to be used on the new medians, islands, Adventure Alley area, slopes and small areas between the fields all in the expanded Bicentennial Park and other areas where the riding mowers can not mow. This would replace the worn out 2 1 " push mower that is now used. Currently the staff spends approximately 10 hours of mowing this area with the 21" mower each week. With the larger cut of 48" versus 21" the mowing time will be cut to about three hours. Field Rake. We purchased one field rake last year to handle the maintenance of the nine ballfields. The rake is very effective and efficient, but due to the demands to get the fields ready between games and in short order after a rain a second field rake is needed. Fall ball is going on now and the Spring season starts in March, so we would like to order as soon as possible. Walk Behind Reel Mower. The City purchased high quality hybrid turf grass (419 Bermuda) for the infields of the new ballfields. To maintain them properly the grass needs to be cut with a reel mower. The riding reel mower that we have causes problems when trying to maneuver it on the (46W infields. A walk behind reel mower is needed to properly maintain this turf. This grass is comparable to golf greens and requires proper attention. 62" Flail Mower. This is to replace the old 62" rotary riding mower that is now dead. Not only is a replacement needed, this mower is designed to make a quality cut for athletic fields, much like a reel mower but less expensive. The cost of a flail riding mower is similar to the cost of a rotary riding mower. The Department's current inventory of mowers include one 62" riding reel, one 72" riding rotary, one dead 62" riding rotary, and two 2 1 " push mowers for about 60 acres of land maintained by the City weekly. Athletic fields are mowed at least twice a week, sometimes three times a week. The new facilities, the use of these facilities, and the Department's desire to provide quality fields all work together to create the need for the new equipment. RECREATION EQUIPMENT NEEDS VAN (16 passenger plus 2 wheel chairs or 20 passengers). Last year the Department spent $5890 on rental of transportation. With continued rental of transportation we could buy a van in six years. If we owned a van we could provide more recreation opportunities for seniors, teens, and the after - school program. We have 20 children from Carroll Elementary that want to attend the after -school program at Durham and would pay an additional $7 a week for the transportation. During the school year we would raise an additional $4620 from this program alone which would reduce the pay-off of the van to 3 years. Hockey Shed S1,100. We have had three sets of goals stolen this past year ($375). Last year we (*Mw had to spend extra staff time to haul the goals back and forth from the hockey court to Bicentennial Park costing (30 minutes each way ) S630 plus needless wear and tear on the equipment. This shed wood be wooden and would be located next to the hockey court during hockey season. During the off season the shed will be stored in the park maintenance yard. Large Tent (40' X 60') S5000. The City now rents tents for special events ( ie. Regional Track Meet, Kite Festival, Harvest Fest, etc.) . The rentals cost from $300 to $500 each day. If we rented this tent for the upcoming events this next year we will spend $8400. We are at the point that owning a tent is more cost effective than renting. The community functions that we would use this tent include Harvest Fest, Picnic in the Park, Easter, Spring Concert, four Summer concerts, Kite Festival, Holidays in the Park, Summer camp, Southlake 40th Birthday Celebrations, ground breakings, dedications, etc. Large Stage $25,000. If we rented a stage for all of the community events this year we would spend $16,500. Again we are at the point that purchasing is more cost effective than renting. This portable stage is prefect for community concerts and festivals. We want a portable stage allowing us more flexibility for events at the schools, Bob Jones Park and Bicentennial Park. This stage would be stored at the new Public Works site. Video Camera $1600. The City is trying to offer more variety in cable coverage of our events and activities. The video camera would allow the staff to tape programs, Park Board meetings, other public meetings, etc. for additional coverage and documentation. Slide Projector $1500. The Community Center and Lodge are used by over 60 groups per year and numerous public meetings where a slide projector has been requested. We are building our equipment inventory so the staff does not have to haul equipment from one building to the other, which increases damage and wear and tear. The Community Center has a TVNCR and we added an overhead projector last year. The slide projector and video camera would fulfill our audio visual needs for the next couple of years. The above list includes all of the Parks and Recreation Department's new request items except for the,additional personnel and a pick-up truck which can wait until the mid -year review. Call me if you have any questions, 481-5581 ext 757. ,4tia__ KML "Kec'd 5 1 ` qb Southlake Girls Softball Association, Inc. P.O. Box 92643 Southlake, Texas 76092 May 2, 1996 President Debbie Orzech Shana K. Yelverton 421-2253 City of Southlake Southlake, Texas 76051 lst Vice President Jeff Mercer Dear Ms. Yelverton: 481-1265 This letter is to inform you of issues, concerns and desires by the Southlake Girls Softball Vice President Alvin Miller Association, Inc. Our intention is to brings forth conversation, understanding and resolution 430-3236 to these issues and concerns and is written because of a belief that there is NO place in the City of Southlake for gender bias or sexual discrimination. Secretary Lisa Quinn We have listed the following areas which we feel need to be address now. 329-3028 Scoreboards. The City of Southlake entered into an agreement with Pepsi to sell only Treasurer Pepsi products at the park. In exchange, the City is to receive 6 new scoreboards. ALL Bill Dillard of the new scoreboards have been given to boys and the girls are left with the old. The 481-3466 new scoreboards have much better light and a count down timer. The fields the girl are left with rarely work and even the staff at the Park and Rec Department have difficulty Ey Manager (6�es getting service. This contract was negotiated by members of the boys organization and signed by the City. The SGSA was NEVER included in any of the conversations regarding 48l-3326 81 this issue. This contract should be renegotiated to include 3 additional scoreboards for the Scheduling girls fields. Bill Dillard 481-3466 Fencing. All of the fencing in the old portion of Bicentennial Park needs to be inspected and repaired. There are many areas which we feel are unsafe due to fences protruding Umpires into pathways or holes that would allow balls to pass. Ric Sanchez 421-0536 Overall Field Conditions. The staff of the Parks and Rec department have done an exceptional job considering there are only two. The city need more people to be able to Uniforms keep the holes, weeds, and grass in good condition. Too many injuries are occurring due Deidra Mulloy lack of maintenance. 488-0536 Sponsors Concession Area. There are approximately 30 new benches at the new baseball facility. D.J. Janes There is only one old wooden bench at the old! The new facility has --a grand covered 481-4400 pavilion. The old has nothing. It would appear to be a low cost item to build some sort of covered area around the old concession stand that could provide protection from the Advisory elements. Some of the new benches should be brought down to the old concession area. Bill Dillard 481-3466 Pathways to all seating areas. There should be concrete pathways to all field seating areas. During the "wet season" our spectators are expected to trudge thru muddy and slippery areas to get to the stands. /0e-10 Page 2. SGSA to City of Southlake - Shana Yelverton. Storage Facilities. SGSA is always in need of additional storage facilities for equipment. We would like for the city to allow SGSA the entire storage building located behind the community building. This would give us ugh to store excess equipment and a place where coaches or board members to. meet if the meeting ities are in use. We have been told that the park board may want to tear down and rebuild a new storage area for SGSA. If this is so, it would be very appreciated. Better Communication. The SGSA and the City of Southlake Parks and Rec department need to communicate better. Examples of problems: The Parks and Rec department put on a softball clinic last summer and no one from the board of SGSA was notified. We could have provided mailing list, called coaches, and assisted had we been included. When the boys were given the two small practice fields that had been previously been assigned to SGSA by and signed by the City, we found out about the transaction/violation from SBA. The Pepsi agreement was negotiated by members of SBA and signed by the City. SGSA was not contacted. We hope the City of Southlake will include SGSA in discussions relating to new softball facilities that may be shared by our organization and the Carroll Independent Schools. We also believe the city should include SGSA in any discussion that relate to the concession and park areas shared by SBA and SGSA. We hope the city will consider these issues and keep the SGSA board apprised of it remedies. �Wcerely, e ie Orzech, Presid t Je r, 1 st Vice President Bill Dillard, Treasurer/Advisor Lisa Quinn, Secretary 4"{� Alvin Mill , Vice President Rusty R es, Chairperson Ric Sanchez, Head Commissi6�� N Iloy, Chairperson City of Southlake, Texas NIEMORANDUiVi May 17, 1996 TO: Shana Yelverton, Assistant City Manager FROM: Kim McAdams Lenoir, Parks & Recreation Director SUBJECT: Response to Southlake Girls Softball Association Following is a response to the May 2, letter you received from the Southlake Girls Softball Association. The Parks & Recreation Department only considers the number of players in the various associations to determine field needs, not what gender the players are. Scoreboards - The four newly constructed fields did not have any scoreboards. • The budget for the Phase I expansion of Bicentennial Park could not cover all of the requests for new facilities. Batting cages and scoreboards were deleted from the list of items that the City would be able to fund in this Phase I construction project. The Southlake Baseball Association expressed a desire to the Parks and Recreation Board to raise funds to buy scoreboards for the four new fields and the two small t-ball fields constructed in 1995. The Board told SBA to proceed with the fundraising for scoreboards on the six fields. SGSA was not included because there are scoreboards on the existing three fields and the City had spent several thousand dollars in 1995 to refurbish those four year old scoreboards. The City understands that SGSA would like new scoreboards like the ones recently installed by SBA on the new fields. The scoreboards were purchased by Pepsi and SBA raised more funds from sponsors to install and maintain the scoreboards. If SGSA would like to make a proposal to the Parks and Recreation Board to do a fundraiser and replace the existing scoreboards, it should be well received. Pepsi and the City are willing to renegotiate the contract next year. Pepsi does not have funds for more scoreboards this year. Fencing - The Parks and Recreation staff have inspected the fencing and gathered" estimates for replacing the fences during the FY 1996-97 budget year. All associations have been given work orders and are asked to report any specific repairs that they notice. The maintenance crew work on work orders daily and we need the help of the citizens to identify areas that need repair. Overall Field Conditions - The maintenance staff now consist of four regular employees and two seasonal positions. We are proposing more maintenance personnel in the FY (11wl 1996-97 budget. SGSA needs to report holes and trip hazards to the Parks and Recreation Department. We have not been made aware of any injuries occurring due to lack of maintenance. We need to be notified immediately of specific incidents - who, what, when, 0 r where, and how .... so we can take immediate corrective action. We need SGSA to notify us immediately of all injuries. Concession Area - There were 20 picnic tables purchased for Bicentennial Park. After they were assembled we left them all at the new pavilion for the Kite Festival. After the festival our plan is to distribute them throughout the park - 8 at the new pavilion, 8-10 to replace the wooden ones in the older section of the park and 2 - 4 at the Adventure Alley Playground. The pavilion in the new section cost $90,000. The Bicentennial Park master plan now under design has the older fields and concession stand to be entirely replaced. Debbie Orzech, President of SGSA was present at the Town Meeting Wednesday where the plans were unveiled. The plans are in my office and if SGSA would like to comment on them I would meet with them to explain the design. Pathways to all seating - The City purchased all new bleachers for all nine fields this year. The City also installed terraced seating on Field #1 this year and added concrete to Field #2 to improve drainage and maintenance. The City will include SGSA request for pathways in the FY 1996-97 budget requests along with other capital improvements in the parks. All budget requests are prioritized and the City Council decides what is funded. Storage Facilities - The City doubled the storage this year for SGSA when SBA moved their storage to the new concession. The City Parks plans to clean out the outside storage yard and remove the old fence now that we have a new maintenance building and yard. But the garage area is still needed by the City for storage. Again this facility will be removed and comparable concession/restroom/pavilion/storage facility like the new one will be built during the renovation of the older fields. Better Communications - The Southlake Parks and Recreation staff sees and talks to the SGSA President Debbie Orzech weekly and does not know of a problem this year that wasn't able to be worked out. To address the examples of better communications presented in the letter, the first two were handled by a previous employee of the department who no longer works here. At the time she set up the softball clinic and assigned the two small fields to SBA she told me she discussed those items with the then President of SGSA Bill Dillard. Bill Dillard signed the agreement last year noting that the two practice fields were not assigned to SGSA. The confusion may be coming from the fact that all the associations request fields first, then when all requests are in, assignments are made. This year SBA requested use of Fields #2 and #3 but in the final assignment of fields they were not assigned those fields. The third item was addressed under the scoreboard item - SBA approached the Park Board. No one knew SGSA wanted new scoreboards at the time. If you have any questions please contact me at 481-5581 extension 757. /O� /`3 City of Southlake, Texas September 18, 1996 TO: Lou Ann Heath, Director of Finance FROM: Billy Campbell, Director of Public Safety SUBJECT: Capital Purchasing I understand the process of which the Council has imposed upon us for capital item purchases. If I may, I would like to comment on various items listed on your Items Funded Through Contract Obligations list concerning the time sequence of purchases. Of the items listed, I am concerned with the vehicles, the Self Contained Breathing Apparatus, Life Packs, Automatic External Defibrilators and the vehicle in Fire Services. I feel that the Self Contained Breathing Apparatus is a safety issue that I would like to address as quickly as possible. There will be a three to four week delivery which would give us approximately one month from the time we order before they would demand payment. From financial standpoint, if possible, I would like a fairly immediate go-ahead with the purchasing of the Life Packs and the two Automatic External Defibrilators. We have a deal working with the vendor where with the combined purchase, they will take back one of the units that we purchased last year and replace it with a new one, and then give us a price break that would basically save us the cost of one of the Defibrilators. The delivery date on those items are 30-60 days. In Police Services there were five vehicles budgeted. I would like to express the need for ordering four of those vehicles as rapidly as possible, the two police Camaros and the two Explorers. The fifth unit can be purchased later in the year when additional personnel come on board. Both the Camaros and the Explorers will require lead time to equip them for duty. This will cause approximately ten vendors to be involved in the equipping of the vehicles. Receiving these vehicles, equipping them and placing them into service will automatically release some other vehicles to go to their intended areas, thus freeing up equipment to be utilized as they are intended. Delivery time on the police vehicles is two weeks to 60 days. In Fire Services, the fire vehicle is a necessary piece of equipment. Upon delivery, we will be moving the existing piece of equipment that will need to be refitted -somewhat and given to Support Services, at which time we will be able to engage in some other projects that we have funded. Other items on the list, while important, can be purchased when funds are available without seriously impacting either service or the implementation of programs. I am available if you have any comments or questions. !/. �- ' BC/bls City of Southlake, Texas September 25, 1996 TO: LouAnn Heath, Director of Finance FROM: Ron Harper, City Engineer SUBJECT: GIS and Engineering Computer Expenditures - Fiscal Year 1996/1997 We would like authorization to expend funds approved in the 96/97 Budget and covered in the "Contract Obligation" bond issue. These funds relate to the continuation of the GIS program and the design of several in-house projects in conjunction with the public works facility on Continental Boulevard. GI - The GIS program has been such a success that we have exceeded our schedule and have begun providing services to a variety of departments including Community Development, Finance, Public Safety, and Economic Development. We are at a stage in the development of this program that in order to do new tasks on the system we continually need to remove data on the hard drive. We would like authorization to purchase the hard drive and system upgrades as shown in the budget. This would result in an expenditure of $5,100 (Disk Space - $1,600, Memory Upgrade for Sun Work Station - $3,200, Memory Upgrade for Plotter - $300). Engineering Design - We are in the process of performing several design projects in-house rather than contracting with an outside consulting firm. In order to properly perform these designs and to produce the proper plans we have requested and have had approved the purchase of an AutoCAD system. In conjunction with the purchase of this software we had planned on the purchase of a computer capable of operating the software. We would like authorization to purchase the computer required for the operation of the AutoCAD software. This purchase will be approximately $4,300. The remaining purchases covered by the "Contract Obligation" bond issue can be defered for a short Deriod of time so that Council can further deliberate. C:\WPWIN60\WPDOCS\GIS\BUD9697.WPD /De—/14e sl 40 City of Southlake, Texas September 25, 1996 TO: LouAnn Heath, Director of Finance FROM: Ron Harper, City Engineer SUBJECT: Building Inspection and Street Department Expenditures - Fiscal Year 1996/1997 We would like authorization to expend funds approved in the 96/97 Budget and covered in the "Contract Obligation" bond issue. These funds relate to support equipment for the newly authorized building inspector and the need to purchase vehicular equipment for the street department. Both of these items (pickup truck and dump truck) are typically ordered through HGAC and may have lengthy lead times. Building ns tion - The adopted budget made provisions for a new building inspector. We need to provide this inspector with a vehicle and accessories. This item was covered in the Contract Obligation list in the amount of $23,000. Streets and Drainage - We had requested a new dump truck in the 96/97 budget. While we probably do not need this vehicle until the second quarter, the lead time for vehicles of this type is usually lengthy. We would like authorization to order this vehicle at this time so that we can have it on line at the beginning of the second quarter The remaining purchases covered by the "Contract Obligation" bond issue can be deferred for a short period of time so that Council can further deliberate_ C:\WPWIN60\WPDOCS\GIS\BUD9697A. WPD b r s ALL FUNDS Revenue Interest Income Fees Assessment Income Developer Participation Carroll ISD Participation City of Keller Participation Total Revenue Water/Sewer Projects 1993 Water Bond Projects ($1.3 million) Water Impact Fee Fund Sewer Impact Fee Fund Waterworks Improvements Fund 1995 Water Bond Projects ($2.5 million) 197 Water/Sewer Bond Projects wer Assessment Fund ubtotal-Water/Sewer Projects Streets/Drainage Proiec 1993 Street Bond Projects ($1.5 million) 1994 Street Bond Projects ($3 million) Perimeter Road Fee Fund Infrastructure Reserve Fund 1997 Infrastructure Reserve Fund Street Impact Fee Fund Drainage-Offsite Fund Subtotal-Streets/Drainage Projects Parks Projects SPDC Revenue Bond Projects Total Expenditures Net Revenue Bond Proceeds Transfers in Transfer out Total Other Sources (Uses) Beginning Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance CITY OF SOLITHLAKE CAPITAL PROJECTS 1996-97 ADOPTED BUDGET FY95-96 FY94-95 Adopted Actual Budget 579,264 340,500 1,029,155 1,365.000 11,239 70,000 36.649 0 25,105 30,000 Q Q 1,681.412 1,805,500 157,091 0 256,199 279,800 692,231 400,000 0 957,047 93,860 1,725,000 0 0 F�I`Yx�%i'�iF��7 509,580 0 336,709 1,853,357 70,393 0 1,780,259 1,967,850 0 0 0 0 Q Q 2,696,941 3,821,207 2,459 011 141,207 6.554.229 8,089.101 (4,872,817) (6,283,601) 5,693,820 1,843,000 958,436 1,081,840 6,242,126 2,683,371 7,727,258 9,096,567 9.096.567 5,496,337 i /D ep-/6 FY95-96 Revised EXHIBIT "A" 97bond3.wk4 02:51 PM 09/12/96 FY96-97 Adopted 399,000 242,500 1,638.056 1,720,000 20,000 65,000 85.000 0 0 0 Q Q 2,142,056 2,027,500 0 .0 496,079 500,000 916,833 1,085,482 1,523,185 757,500 1,166,249 2,881,000 0 1,035,740 5,138,086 5,790.000 1,670,000 12,683,982 28,147 0 703,823 1,154,910 0 0 2,227,059 575,000 0 3,551,618 0 0 Q Q 2,959,029 5,281,528 320,435 8.417.550 Q 17,965,510 (6,275,494) (15,938,010) 2,797,380 12,672,000 2,105,393 0 (909,351) 3,993,422 (113.39Z) 12,558,603 9,096,567 6,814,495 6,814,495 3.435.088 Page 20 City of Southlake, Texas MEMORANDUM October 11, 1996 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Bob Whitehead, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Requested Variance to the Sign Ordinance 506-A, Section 16 (4), for Bank of America Sign in Village Center, Phase I BACKGROUND Chandler Sign Company has applied for a variance to the Sign Ordinance 506-A, Section 16 (4), to allow a "Bank of America" Sign to be placed on the front of the Kroger Store that is currently under construction at 1210 E. Southlake Blvd. A similar variance was granted to Nations Bank located in the Albertson's Store on W. Southlake Blvd. City Council will recall that on April 16, 1996, the Developer and Kroger presented to Council a comprehensive signage plan for Village Center, Phases I and II. Council did approve variances for Kroger which allowed. larger letter on the front, a sign on the back and signs over the secondary entrance that display "Food" and "Pharmacy". The hardship as expressed by the applicant is "allowable square footage for Kroger Signs on the building leaves no available square footage for the `Bank of America' signage. " The Bank of America is in the Kroger Store with no outside entrance. The requested variance is to allow a 2 foot by 26 foot "Bank of America" Sign to be placed to the left of the secondary entrance to the Kroger Store. The attached building elevation shows the proposed sign and location. RECOMMENDATION Please place this request for a variance to the Sign Ordinance 506-A, Section 16 (4), on the Regular City Council Agenda for October 15, 1996 for City Council review and consideration. attachments: Memo from Chuch Bloomberg, Plan Examiner Ordinance No. 506-A, :Section 16 (4) Sign Variance Application Sign Exhibits 10 D-1 October 9, 1996 TO: Bob Whitehead, P. E., Director of Public Works FROM: Charles Bloomberg, C. B. O., Plans Examiner C/ ---> SUBJECT: , Sign Variance Appeal at Village Center for Bank of America Mr. Rocky Gray of Chandler Sign Co. has applied for a variance to allow an additional sign on the front of the Kroger store under construction at 2110 E. Southlake Blvd. The purpose of the sign is to advertise there is a banking facility inside the grocery store. On April 16, 1996 the City Council heard a request from Midland Development for signs throughout the Village Center. As approved that evening, Kroger was permitted three signs. They included the 10' 6" high on the front and back as well as the sign over the secondary entrance that says Food & Pharmacy. This request is to add a Bank of America sign on the building to the left of the Food & Pharmacy sign. The bank is a space within the grocery store. It does not have its own outside entrance and therefore is not viewed as a lease space entitled to its own sign. Chandler Sign Co. has requested this item be on the agenda for the October 15, 1996 City. Council meeting. I told Mr. Gray that a representative of Kroger and of The Midland Group should be present in case there are questions for them. attachments: sign variance application sign drawings site plan [[I]-11M ARTICLE IV - GENERAL SIGN PROVISIONS SEC. 15 WIND PRESSURE AND DEAD LOAD REQUIREMENT All signs shall be designed and constructed to withstand a wind pressure of not less than thirty (30) pounds per square foot of area and shall be constructed to receive dead loads as required by the Uniform Building Code. The sign permit application must include a statement signed. by the applicant which states compliance with this requirement. ATTACHEDSEC. 16 PERMITTED SIGN STRUCTURM AND GENERAL REGULATIONS A. 1. GENERAL: Unless otherwise specifically provided, the regulations set forth in this subsection shall be applicable to all attached signs which are allowed under this ordinance. Signs may not be attached to light fixtures, poles, curbs, sidewalks, gutters, streets, utility poles, public buildings,• fences, railings, public telephone poles, or trees. The direct painting of signs on buildings shall be prohibited except for signs less than a three (3) square feet area used for building identification. 2. MAXIMUM LETTER/LOGO HEIGHT: The maximum height allowed for letters or logos shall be based on the following criteria: Distance From R.O.W. Maximum Letter/Logo Height Less than 50 ft. 24 inches. 51 - 100 ft. 30 inches 101 - 150 ft. 36 inches. 151 - 200 ft. 42 inches 201 - 250 ft. 48 inches 251 - 300 ft. 54 inches 301 and greater 60 inches 3.' MAXIMUM AREA: 1.5 square feet for every one foot of width of building or lease space not to exceed 400 square feet - see Appendix 'A' for further -clarification. 4. NUMBER OF SIGNS: Only one attached sign per street frontage shall be allowed on any site, unless otherwise specifically provided in this ordinance. S. SIGN WIDTH: Attached signs shall be.limited in width to the .middle': seventy five percent (75%-) of the width of any building or lease space (see Appendix 'B' for further clarification). 6. ROOF LINE LIMITATIONS: In no case shall an attached sign project above the roof line of any building, except those attached to parapet walls and the sign may not extend above the parapet wall, 7. ILLUMINATION: Attached signs may only be illuminated utilizing internal lighting. Letters with exposed neon lighting are allowed. 8. PROTRUSIONS: Attached signs may not protrude farther than eighteen inches (1811) from the building, excluding signs attached to canopies. 9. RESIDENTIAL ADJACENCY: Attached signs shall not be allowed on any facade other than the main front of the building which faces property zoned for single-family residential uses if the sign is within one hundred .fifty feet (150') of the property 'line of said residential property. I0D-3 G:\0RD\S1GNS\FD7_3-21.WPD NAME: ADDRESS: CITY OF SOUTHLAKE SIGN VARIANCE APPLICATION APPLICANT Chandler Sign 3201 Manor Way., Dallas, TX 75235 PHONE: 214-902-2000 - FAX: 214-902-2044 February 6, 1995 OWNER (if different) Bank of America 1925 W John Carpenter Frwy Irving, TX 75063 The following information pertains to the location for which the variance is being requested: NAME OF BUSINESS OR OPERATION: Bank of America PHYSICAL ADDRESS: 2110 Southlake Blvd LEGAL DESCRIPTION : Lot Block Subdivision I hereby certify that this application is complete as per the requirements of Sign Ordinance No. 506 as summarized below. I further understand that it is necessary to have a Cessesentative at the City Council meeting who is authorized to discuss this request, any unresolved issues, and approve changes, if any. Applicant's Signature:-�L Date- For City Use Only: I hereby acknowledge receipt of the si variance applic iop and the appliction fie in the amount of $ on this the day of ff 199 Signed:4 Title: 1�4 C..%C��-r44-P _ The following checklist is a summary of requirements for sign variance requests as required by the City of.Southlake. The applicant should further refer to the Sign Ordinance No. 506 and amendments, and other ordinances maps, and codes available at the City Hall that may pertain to this sign variance request. X Completed sign variance request application. X Completed demonstration of conditions applicable to the requested variance (see attached.) Site plan showing the location of the sign variance rerhevariance t he` signs that conform to or are exempt from the sign ordit plan, shall also indicate the building, landscaped areas, paaches �n� adjoining street R.O.W. �' L ` X Scaled and dimensioned elevations of the signs for whiis ` requested. For attached signs, the elevations shall show G�ia b '_ g, the sign for which the variance is requested, and any other s A that conform to or are exempt from the sign ordinance. 1 OD-4 Demonstration recmes ted s i gn variance: 1. That a literal enforcement of the sign regulations will create an unnecessary hardship or practical difficulty on the applicant. Allowable square footage for Kroger signs on this building leaves no available square footage.for the "Bank of America" signage. 2. That the situation causing the. unnecessary hardship or practical difficulty is unique to the affected property and is not self imposed. Kroger's sign package requires them to use certain signs which use allowable footage. 3. That the variance will not injure and will be wholly compatible with the use and permitted development of adjacent properties. The Kroger building is a large facility. The additional "Bank of America" letters will not create an overuse or misuse of appropriate building graphics. 4. That the variance will be in harmony with the spirit and purpose of the sign ordinance. With the spirit and purpose to allow business to identify themselves within the city, harmony is well maintained. G:\WPF\FORMS\APPS\SXGN-VAR.WPD l OD-5 { WORK ORDER 1 NUMBER I DESIGN NUMBER g6-2609 NUMBE SHEET OF 2 W J `VS l0 Go in 4•f �yy L \` 3F\ Izo v O y U N X W W W L 1�XWme= d���HZ W .. W �Z�4n=Z nOL. a: N Z N P f i Lou y N ce W } .0 0 Z � �OO J>edd „g� p 10D-6 . 0 0 E tl ci 3 �K 0 0 C C .0.. Ir of O K oo 0o o'G OY W.2.0 CC H o ago-> > cm 0 00 C1 0 0 `b ] � O` Z f` H �O rL 0I N X H OL 0 O O M V C D O J 7 a m O h O W W r f C�O O C' U J is r I� CLIENT BANK OF AMERICA ADDRESS VILLAGE CENTER CITY/STATE SOU MLAKE.TEXA5 SALES R. GRAY avE &19 96 ARTIST KEN Y MC F DATE Chandler Signs slot MoTSOF1NOy 214-M-2000 OOIIOs. TX 752J5 FAX 214-902.2044 3MI Chevy RldOe M C301 210349d404 Son Mianlq IX 7a= FAX 210449-9724 W DRA042 611E FROPWOF C1MtOLLR W,tA M AND ALL MGM TO 43 LISE FOR RBROOUQDN ARE RES MWCNY4X& 9GNS, NC DISTRIBUTION OF PRINTS MASTER ❑ FILE ❑ CAD ELECTRICAL ❑ PLEX ❑ CAM SERVICE ❑ PAINT ❑ HEAT T-U*Z ❑ CUSTOM ❑ VINYL ❑ AWN. A= ❑ ALUMINUM ❑ NEON ❑ M6TALL ❑ CHNI LTR. ❑ SCREEN ❑ ❑ ASSEMBLY ❑ AWNING ❑ ❑ TOTAL xv; LT:t-I aa.N 96/co/vo X1 3AVIHInOS "I 1N33 39VIIIA JLnOAVl L 3SVHd UNV L 3SVHdlow WM f�4 IA.; zx0«i >It W« K i I t. 1 � t llll�i � J �o fit Kill 1 damn 1 i S I I � = I :\:::c:ci.9:0�CtlCiL►L�_:.t i �:ri�7 7�� �y� 0 Fill 11 City of Southlake, Texas MEMORANDUM October 10, 1996 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Greg Last, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Impervious Coverage Ordinance Attached you will find a letter from Bill Kemp dated September 16, 1996 regarding a proposal for modification of the zoning ordinance to provide for impervious coverage requirements. It was my understanding from the last discussion of this request with City Council that the proponents of the ordinance were going to get with staff to resolve some perceived inconsistencies in the proposal. We are available to do that at your direction. It is my understanding that Council will be evaluating the priorities for processing several pending ordinance requests at the upcoming meeting. Please contact me if you have any questions. GL/gl L:\WP-FILES\MEMO\STAFF\CEH\IMP-COVI.WPD �1A- A WILLIRM B. KEMP 400 SOUTHRIDGE LAKES PKWY. SOUTHLRKE, TEHRS 76092 (817) 329-6015 September 16, 1996 City Council City of Southlake 667 North Carroll Avenue Southlake, Texas 76092 Dear Councilmembers: =�' 19 096 COPY On January 18,1996, I wrote a letter to members of City Council recommending that Southlake adopt an impervious coverage requirement. A copy of my January 18 letter is enclosed. This issue was placed on a City Council agenda and was considered at a meeting in May. I was out of town and could not attend that meeting. My understanding is that there was a brief discussion of my proposal but that no further consideration or action has been taken with respect to it. I have heard rumors that two issues were raised at the City Council meeting. The first was that more information was required regarding what similar ordinances other cities in our area may have adopted. In my letter I described the Grapevine ordinance and acknowledged that I had used the structure of the Grapevine ordinance as the model for my proposal. I proposed a more stringent impervious coverage requirement for Southlake because of the low density requirements that we have adopted in Southlake for residential zoning. Please refer to my January 18 letter for more details on this point. In any event, I suggest that the approaches other cities in our area may have taken in this regard is irrelevant because Southlake, by requiring a half acre minimum lot size, has intentionally decided not to be like its surrounding cities. We are different and we have higher property values because of that difference. Southlake should seek guidance from other cities around the nation which have determined that low density, high quality development is in their best interests in the long run. One such city is Germantown, Tennessee. Germantown has a maximum impervious coverage requirement of 65 percent. It has had this requirement since 1989, and the city planner advises me that this requirement has not hindered commercial development. To the contrary, commercial development in Germantown is of the highest quality. A copy of the Germantown rule is enclosed. REGD SEP 2 31996 I have also heard a rumor that city staff believes a maximum impervious coverage requirement should be contained in the landscape ordinance. I am (W somewhat baffled by this comment, assuming it is true. The Zoning Ordinance addresses such issues as the types of uses that are permitted in various districts and the development regulations that apply in each zoning district. My proposal is clearly a development regulation. It is similar to such requirements as the maximum percentage of a lot that can be covered by buildings and the minimum sizes of front, side and rear yards. The landscaping ordinance addresses the landscaping requirements for the interior of a lot. Separately, section 42 of the Zoning Ordinance requires bufferyards, and contains detailed rules regarding the landscaping of bufferyards. There are inconsistencies and conflicts between these two sets of rules, but that is a separate issue. An impervious coverage requirement has nothing to do with what trees should be planted where. Its objective is to achieve harmony between low density residential development and commercial development, to assure adequate drainage and to promote an aesthetically pleasing environment thereby maintaining and improving property values. I am concerned that such a fundamental proposal as maximum impervious coverage has not already been acted upon. In my letter I proposed precise amendments to the Zoning Ordinance that would accomplish my proposal. I would appreciate your assistance in placing this proposal on a City Council meeting agenda. (W Sincerely yours, William B. Kemp 0 I I A-? WILLIRM B. KEMP 400 SOUTHRIDGE LAKES PKWY. SOUTHLRKE, TEHRS 76092 (817) 329-6015 January 18, 1996 City Council City of Southlake 667 North Carroll Avenue Southlake, Texas 76092 Dear Councilmembers: In Southlake In Review, Vol. 4, No. 4 (June/July 1995) a summary of the citizen satisfaction survey concluded that " [r]espondents believe low density and design and appearance regulations are the two factors that most distinguish Southlake as a place to live." The desire of Southlake citizens for low density is reflected in the minimum lot size requirement of effectively 20,000 sq. ft. By way of contrast, Grapevine has a minimum lot size of only 7500 sq. ft. Under present law, however, it appears that the desires of Southlake's citizens for low density development are not reflected in the regulations regarding commercial development. The semi -rural environment that is evident in residential neighborhoods will be lost if commercial development on major streets is too dense, with resultant heavy traffic, numerous traffic signals, increased accidents and increasingly stressful driving situations. Density for residential development is controlled by minimum lot size. Commercial development, however, typically is controlled through regulation of maximum building coverage and maximum impervious coverage. Southlake's limitation on maximum building coverage is 50 to 60 percent (60 for C-3 and C-4). Southlake does not regulate maximum impervious coverage. By way of contrast, Grapevine limits building coverage for their equivalent of C-3 and C-4 districts to 60 percent and impervious coverage to 80 percent. I propose that Southlake amend its ordinance to reflect a lower commercial density requirement than that of Grapevine. Specifically I propose that maximum building coverage be limited to 50 percent for all commercial classifications and that maximum impervious coverage be limited to 70 percent. The recently proposed Southlake Commons development provides an illustration of the impact that further regulation would have. While the Southlake Commons proposal appears to be high quality, the concept plan reveals that there will be very little open space (including landscaping) if it is completed as proposed. The buildings will cover 25.5 percent of the site. The parking lots and driveways will cover 56.63 percent of the site. These parking I I A- areas will accommodate 1713 vehicles. The total impervious coverage is 82.13 percent. Thus, even Grapevine, which permits residential lots of 7500 sq. ft., would not permit so vast a total coverage in a commercial development. The Southlake Commons proposal illustrates that a maximum building coverage of 50 percent would have no effect on virtually all developments. A Southlake requirement of 70 percent maximum impervious coverage would still be relatively less strict when compared to Grapevine than Southlake's regulation of residential development. Given the rate at which applications for commercial development are being filed in Southlake, I believe it is important that the zoning ordinance be amended promptly to address these issues. Accordingly, I have drafted an ordinance that provides for the amendments I have proposed. Sincerely yours, William B. Kemp cc: Greg Last N M I l A -S ORDINANCE NO. 480-_ AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 480, AS AMENDED, THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS, BY PROVIDING A MAXIMUM IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE REGULATION IN THE "0-1" OFFICE DISTRICT, THE "0-2" OFFICE DISTRICT, THE "C-1" NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL DISTRICT, THE "C-2" LOCAL RETAIL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT, THE "C-3" GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT, AND THE "C-4" ARTERIAL MALL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT; BY MODIFYING THE MAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE REGULATION IN THE "C- 3" GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT, AND THE "C-4" ARTERIAL MALL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT; 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 PHAMPLET 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 Ciy of Southlake has heretofore adopted Ordinance No. 480, as amended, as the zoning ordinance of the city; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Southlake now deems it necessary to amend Ordinance No. 480, as amended, to provide a maximum impervious coverage regulation in the "0-1" Office District, the "0-2" Office District, the "C-1" Neighborhood Commercial District, the "C-2" Local Retail Commercial District, the "C-3" General Commercial District, and the "C-4" Arterial Mall Commercial District, and to modify the maximum lot coverage regulation in the "C-3" General Commercial District, and the "C-4" Arterial Mall Commercial District; and WHEREAS, the city council has given published notice and held public hearings with respect to the amendments of the zoning ordinance as required by law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS: SECTION 1. Section 18.5 "Development Regulations" in the 0-1 Office District is hereby amended by revising Section 18.5.e. as follows: 1 I1A-C- 24 "e. Maximum Building Coverage: All buildings or structures shall have a maximum lot coverage not exceeding fifty (50) percent of the lot area." Section 18.5 "Development Regulations" in the 0-1 Office District is hereby amended by renumbering Sections 18.51,18.5.g. and 18.5.h. as Sections 18.5.g., 18.5.h. and 18.51 respectively. Section 18.5 "Development Regulations" in the 0-1 Office District is hereby amended by adding a new Section 18.51 as follows: "f. Maximum Impervious Coverage: All buildings or structures, parking, storage, loading and other paved areas shall have a maximum lot coverage not exceeding seventy (70) percent of the lot area." SECTION 2. Section 20.5 "Development Regulations" in the C-1 Neighborhood Commercial District is hereby amended by revising Section 20.5.e. as follows: "e. Maximum Building Coverage: All buildings or structures shall have a maximum lot coverage not exceeding fifty (50) percent of the lot area." Section 20.5 "Development Regulations" in the C-1 Neighborhood Commercial District is hereby amended by renumbering Sections 20.5.f., 20.5.g., 20.5.h., 20.51, 20.5.j. and 20.5.k. as Sections 20.5.g., 20.5.h., 20.51, 20.5.j., 20.5.k. and 20.5.1. respectively. Section 20.5 "Development Regulations" in the C-1 Neighborhood Commercial District is hereby amended by adding a new Section 20.51 as follows: "f. Maximum Impervious Coverage: All buildings or structures, parking, storage, loading and other paved areas shall have a maximum lot coverage not exceeding seventy (70) percent of the lot area." SECTION 3. Section 21.5 "Development Regulations" in the C-2 Local Retail Commercial District is hereby amended by revising Section 21.5.e. as follows: "e. Maximum Building Coverage: All buildings or structures shall have a maximum lot coverage not exceeding fifty (50) percent of the lot area." Section 21.5 "Development Regulations" in the C-2 Local Retail Commercial District is hereby amended by renumbering Sections 21.51, 21.5.g., 21.5.h., 21.51, 21.5.j. and 21.5.k. as Sections 21.5.g., 21.5.h., 21.5.i., 21.5.j., 21.5.k. and 21.5.1. respectively. 2 I I V7 Section 21.5 "Development Regulations" in the C-2 Local Retail Commercial District is hereby amended by adding a new Section 21.51 as follows: "f. Maximum Impervious Coverage: All buildings or structures, parking, storage, loading and other paved areas shall have a maximum lot coverage not exceeding seventy (70) percent of the lot area." SECTION 4. Section 22.5 "Development Regulations" in the C-3 General Commercial District is hereby amended by revising Section 22.5.e. as follows: "e. Maximum Building Coverage: All buildings or structures shall have a maximum lot coverage not exceeding fifty (50) percent of the lot area." Section 22.5 "Development Regulations" in the C-3 General Commercial District is hereby amended by renumbering Sections 22.51, 22.5.g., 22.5.h., 22.51, 22.5.j. and 22.5.k. as Sections 22.5.g., 22.5.h., 22.51, 22.5.j., 22.5.k. and 22.5.1. respectively. Section 22.5 "Development Regulations" in the C-3 General Commercial District is hereby amended by adding a new Section 22.51 as follows: "f. Maximum Impervious Coverage. All buildings or structures, parking, storage, loading and other paved areas shall have a maximum lot coverage not exceeding seventy (70) percent of the lot area. For the purposes of this section, lot area shall not include any areas that the Texas Department of Transportation proposes to acquire as future right of way." SECTION S. Section 23.5 "Development Regulations" in the C-4 Arterial Mall Commercial District is hereby amended by revising Section 23.5.e. as follows: "e. Maximum Building Coverage: All buildings or structures shall have a maximum lot coverage not exceeding fifty (50) percent of the lot area." Section 23.5 "Development Regulations" in the C-4 Arterial Mall Commercial District is hereby amended by renumbering Sections 23.51, 23.5.g., 23.5.h., 23.51, 23.5.j., 23.5.k., 23.5.1., 23.5.m. and 23.5.n. as Sections 23.5.g., 23.5.h., 23.51, 23.5.j., 23.5.k., 23.5.1., 23.5.m., 23.5.n. and 23.5.o. respectively. Section 23.5 "Development Regulations" in the C-4 Arterial Mall Commercial District is hereby amended by adding a new Section 23.51 as follows: 'T Maximum Impervious Coverage: All buildings or structures, parking, storage, loading and other paved areas shall have a maximum lot 3 i (A-9 coverage not exceeding seventy (70) percent of the lot area. For the purposes of this section, lot area shall not include any areas that the Texas Department of Transportation proposes to acquire as future right of way." SECTION 6. 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 7. 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 8. (40", 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 ($2000.00) for each offense. Each day that a violation is permitted to exist shall constitute a separate offense. SECTION 9. All rights and remedies of the City of Southlake are expressly saved as to any and all violations of the provisions of Ordinance 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 10. The City Secretary of the City of Southlake is hereby authorized to publish this ordinance in book or phamphlet 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 I (A-9 A SECTION 11. 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 12. 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 ,1996. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY 61 I (A-Vo o cl O r O _�C x u O `" > c u "' c0 H t.. E u c.. O -C C c 0 O u 0 Gn J U y <1 •L7 U O A U Ln a..UU ' v L7 o h >� H O b j o cd -C " u. C -O _Mc u O IA L. C u O L ' c c O. O p 'b O> c� tn O.O 0 3.O p4, c <v W coo cx a E> .�.c� ccd.c° ,�.o u H ►-� 13 AW E-y •ac��, nE. .HX s�H .'a H.D,0 i c a uc> QO c a �,u cc a -0Nu :E ►°oa.uo>2u"a :0v>oo�tO °� c > •c c c u u > aa u u cl C.7 C) bo c a N •v c v � E .a � o ?, � ao p_ C OLn U C C ►-t ,,� ca '��' u 0 o p h Q O in > H .p > 0. u b C �;, 3 C u 'O O W W o ff• E A. ao 0 o u.� �� a•co o 'b E 3 o Cl.ao O p •t7 .a $' 'o c c R. c o •a u •--1 U cO'S uCpa cifcri .-x ap U ' , 0h xO 'a> � •a . FIRM 3 v v s v 0 "C E E o E o b 'E c O U U •y U .0 ctl •b b y O•y.0 uy tom_,. VN C �+ Ln O O cq u o c u h o :3.0U E to b c a u �uC4u Uu� c� m ;1 v H s s City of Southlake, Texas MEMORANDUM October 9, 1996 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Karen P. Gandy, Zoning Administrator SUBJECT: Residential P.U.D. Density For the purpose of discussion on the above -listed subject, I offer the following: MAXIMUM RESIDENTIAL DENSITY: The number of dwelling units per gross acre. [Source: Ordinance No. 480, Appendix A, Page 1 of 21 Applicable subsections from Section 30, "Planned Unit Developments," noting that the minimum size of a P.U.D. is based on gross acres as well. "30.3 RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS - Where the PUD District is developed primarily for residential uses, the tract shall have a gross area of at least fifty (50) acres. A residential PUD district may be designed to accommodate the following development: a. Dwelling units grouped into clusters, allowing an appreciable amount of land for open space. b. Projects with much or all of their housing in townhouses or apartments or both. C. Higher densities than conventional single-family projects of the same acreage. d: Part of the land used for non-residential purposes, such as shopping or employment centers. e. Preservation or enhancement of areas exhibiting environmentally significant natural features. 30.4 NON-RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS - Where the PUD District is developed primarily for non-residential uses, the tract shall have a gross area of at least ten (10) acres. A non- residential PUD district may be designed to accommodate the following development: a. Commercial or industrial uses grouped into clusters, allowing an appreciable amount of the land for open space or joint use such as parking and storage. b. Commercial or industrial projects with part of the land used for residential purposes. Single purpose commercial or industrial uses projected to involve innovative land utilization." Note that Subsection 30.5, "Development Regulations," established that residential P.U.D.s should not exceed the maximum density of the least restrictive single family district in place at the time of the rezoning application (i.e., "SF-20A" which permits 2.18 d.u. per acre). This subsection has been amended three (3) times since the ordinance was adopted in September 19, 1989. Amendment "C" ^urtis E. Hawk, City Manager October 9, 1996 age Two (approved on March 19,1991) was the only amendment dealing with the density issue. It established that the overall density of the development be reviewed with each phase of the project. Amendment "L" (approved June 15,1993) permitted the Board of Adjustment to grant limited variances to setback and lot coverage only. Amendment "U" (approved April 16, 1996) established open space/planting requirements for non-residential zero lot line developments. "30.5 DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS - The height, setback, area, floor space, and other development regulations for permissible uses in a PUD district shall conform to the development regulations which would be applicable to such uses if the same were situated in the most restrictive district in which such uses are permitted. Zero lot line development may be permitted for non-residential uses on a common interior lot line where construction of a party wall is used. Where zero lot development is utilized, the equivalent open space and plantings (normally provided in adjoining bufferyards along the common lot line) shall be provided elsewhere within the two developing lots. In addition, the City Council may approve more flexible development standards if other design features provide adequate protection to surrounding and adjacent properties. For any residential PUD. the maximum density permitted shall be equal to the maximum density permitted under the least restrictive single family zoning district at the time the PUD is granted. In any residential PUD, all buildings and structures shall have a maximum lot coverage not exceeding thirty percent (30%) of the lot area, except the sum Ce total of accessory buildings shall not exceed six hundred (600) square feet. (As amended by Ordinance No. 480-U.) When developing.a residential PUD in phases the City Council shall establish in the individual PUD ordinance the maximum densiV permitted in each phase to assure that the maximum density of the entire residential PUD is not exceeded once complete buildout is achieved. (As amended by Ordinance No. 480-C.) The Board of Adjustment may grant variances of up to, but not exceeding, ten percent (10%) of any required setback or lot coverage requirement established by the City Council in the specific P.U.D. regulations at the time of zoning of said Planned Unit Development. This approval shall be per the requirements set forth in Section 44.3 (b) of the Zoning Ordinance. (As amended by Ordinance No. 480-L)" Listed below are other definitions relating to density: "DENSITY - The average number of families, persons, or housing units per unit of land; usually density is expressed "per acre." Thus, the density of a development of 300 units occupying 40 acres is 7.5 units per acre." (Note again that this calculation is based on gross acres.) [Source: The Language of Zoning: a Glossary of Words and Phrases, Michael J. Meshenberg] "DENSITY - The number of families, individuals, dwelling units, households, or housing structures per unit of land." U-z ';urtis E. Hawk, City Manager (� ctobLee 9, 1996 age Comment. Ordinances regulating density must make it clear as to whether the standard is stated in net or gross density. Gross density includes all the area within the boundaries of the particular area, excluding nothing. Net density excludes certain areas, such as streets, easements, water areas, lands with environmental constraints, and so on. The exclusions have to be spelled out carefully." [Source: The New Illustrated Book of Development Definitions, Harvey S. Moskowitz and Carl G. Lindbloom] "NET AREA OF LOT (NET ACREAGE) - The area of the lot excluding those features or areas that the development ordinance excludes from the calculations. Comment. A development ordinance might exclude, for density or area calculation purposes, undevelopable or critical areas of land, such as floodways, wetlands, areas with steep slopes, or other constrained areas or easements. However, in recent years, court cases have sharply restricted the ability to exclude these lands, particularly where a state land use law defines terms differently." [Source: The New Illustrated Book of Development Definitions, Harvey S. Moskowitz and Carl G. Lindbloom] "DENSITY, CONTROL OF - A limitation on the occupancy of land. Density can be controlled through zoning by one method or a combination of the following methods: (1) use restrictions, e.g., single- or (iultiple-family dwellings; (2) minimum lot size requirements; (3) floor area ratio; (4) land -use -intensity Woning [based on the levels of concentration or activity in uses such as residential, commercial, industrial, recreation, or parking]; (5) setback and yard requirements; (6) minimum house size requirements; (7) establishing ratios between the number and types of housing units and land area; (8) direct limitation on units per acre; requirements for lot area per dwelling unit; and other means. the major distinction between different residential districts often is in their allowable density." [Source: The Language of Zoning: a Glossary of Words and Phrases, Michael J. Meshenberg] In approving the flexible development standards for each R-PUD, any of the methods listed above can be utilized for controlling density; however, the zoning ordinance specifically addresses the R-PUD density issue by the 2.18 du/ac. calculation. Staff will await the City Council's direction on whether to pursue changes to Section 30.5 to address this issue. Should you have questions regarding any of the above, please call me at (817) 481-5581, extension 743. t(B -3 tM City of Southlake, Texas MEMORANDUM October 8,1996 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Karen P. Gandy, Zoning Administrator SUBJECT: Neighborhood Preservation Ordinance No. 480-Qi (Draft No. 9b) Attached is the Neighborhood Preservation Ordinance No. 480-Q, (Draft 9b) as recommended by the Planning and Zoning Commission with an affirmative vote of (7-0) on October 5, 1995. Historically, this ordinance has been discussed numerous times during the last 18 to 20 months. Staff forwarded a copy of Draft 9 to one -hundred -forty-two (142) people on the corridor mailing list and asked that they submit any comments to us by October 9, 1995. The ordinance (and its economic impact on commercial development) was also a topic of discussion during the Economic Development Roundtable on October 18, 1995. On December 14, 1995, the City Council and the Planning and Zoning Commission met in Joint Work Session to discuss Draft 9b. The first reading of Ordinance No. 480-Q was continued until January 16, 1996 and at this hearing, the Council called a work session on this item for February 13, 1996. Later, the Council scheduled another work session for April 2, 1996, which was continued until the following Tuesday, April 9, 1996. Throughout this process, only six (6) written responses were received: Rick Wilhelm, Ed Walts, Richard Kuhlman, William B. Kemp, Steve Yetis, and a Southlake Chamber of Commerce Resolution. These letters as well as the City Attorneys' responses to the ordinance are attached to this draft. During a public hearing, June Haney asked that the lighting requirements in the Neighborhood Ordinance be as stringent as those'requirements in the Corridor Overlay Zone. A cut and paste comparison of the Corridor Overlay Zone requirements and the requirements proposed in the Neighborhood Preservation Ordinance is also enclosed. As you will recall, the purpose of this ordinance is to preserve and protect existing and planned residential neighborhoods within the City from the possible adverse impact of business and commercial uses developing adjacent to the neighborhoods. Adoption of this revision would establish special neighborhood preservation development regulations such that non -single family development is compatible and complementary with adjoining single family residential properties. These regulations are in addition to those in the underlying zoning district for the non -single family residential use. Following is an executive summary of the proposed regulations: • APPLICABILITY: All non -single family residential properties which adjoin or are within 400' of single family residential property (known as the control distance). MASONRY REQUIREMENTS: All structures shall have an exterior finish of brick or natural stone covering a minimum of eighty percent (80%) of the area of each facade, excluding doors and windows. City of Southlake, Texas • HEIGHT: All structures shall not exceed the maximum height permitted in the "SF -IA" Single Family Residential District. • EXTERIOR LIGHTING: The exterior lighting shall operate in such a manner as to ensure that lighting patterns are directed onto the non -single family residential property and do not directly project onto adjacent single family residential property. • TRASH RECEPTACLES: No trash receptacles shall be allowed within fifty feet (50') of single family residential property. All structures under this section shall construct masonry screening walls around all trash receptacles. Screening walls shall be four-sided with a gate and shall be a minimum height of eight feet (8'). • PERFORMANCE STANDARDS: • Developments shall ensure that the disposal of and collection of solid waste, trash and other refuse into trash receptacles or dumpsters does not occur between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. • Developments shall ensure that deliveries made by vehicles exceeding 10,000 pounds gross vehicle weight (G.V.W.) shall not be received nor dispatched between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. ROOF REQUIREMENTS: The roof systems of all structures shall be of the same type (e.g., gable, hip, shed) and the same pitch (e.g., 6:12, 8:12, 10:12), and clad of the same materials that are found on the majority of single family residential properties lying within the control distance. • If the roof system exceeds the maximum permitted height, a mansard roof system may be utilized if it is enclosed on all sides and that the pitch, height and cladding of the mansard roof is compatible with the roof systems on the majority of single family residential properties within the control distance. Insufficient Comparisons Available: The roof systems of all structures shall be gable or hip with 6:12 minimum pitch and clad with composition shingles, slate or a man-made slate -like product. If the roof system exceeds the maximum permitted height, a mansard roof system (enclosed on all sides) may be utilized provided that the mansard roof have a pitch between 6:12 and 10:12, a minimum height of twenty-five feet (25') and is clad with composition shingles, slate or a man- made slate -like product. • LOCATION: If the structure to be regulated is located on the same street as single family residential property and if single family residential property is within the control distance, the following shall be required: • Front and Side Yards: The regulated structure shall have front and side yards equivalent to the front and side yards required for the single family residential property, but not less than the front and side yards as required by the underlying zoning district of the regulated structure. Parking Limitations: If the regulated structure is oriented the same as the single family residential property, no vehicular parking shall be permitted in the area which comprises the front yard of the non -single family residential structure. City of Southlake, Texas • Display of Merchandise: If the regulated structure is oriented the same as the single family residential property, the regulated structure shall not display sales merchandise in windows visible from single family residential properties. Window and Door Requirements: All structures shall have window (e.g., single -hung, double - hung, casement, awning...) and door (e.g., flush, paneled, french...) structures similar to those that are found on the majority of single family residential property lying within the control distance. Insrfficient Comparisons Available: The window structures shall be single -hung, double -hung, casement or awning, and door structures shall be flush, paneled or french. MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT SCREENING: All buildings must be designed such that no roof - mounted mechanical equipment (HVAC, etc.) or satellite dishes in excess of eighteen inches (18") shall be visible (as defined herein). Ground -mounted mechanical equipment and satellite dishes in excess of eighteen inches (18") shall be screened by a wooden or masonry fence or by landscaping material to a height one foot higher than the object being screened. VARIANCES AND APPEALS: At the time of review of any required Concept Plan or Site Plan, the City Council may grant variances to the neighborhood preservation development regulations if the applicant can meet certain criteria. The City Council may grant a variance by an affirmative vote of a majority of the City Council members present and voting on the matter. If a variance application is denied by the City Council, no other variance of like kind relating to the same project or proposed project shall be considered or acted upon by the City Council for a period of six (6) months subsequent to the denial. CONFLICTING REGULATIONS: The neighborhood preservation development standards shall supersede any other provision established by the zoning ordinance or other ordinances, except that when conflicting requirements are found, the more stringent requirements shall apply. However, the following exception shall apply: Corridor Overlay Zone requirements found in Section 43 shall take precedence if there are conflicting standards with these regulations. During the NPO Work Session on February 13,1996, Council asked staff to provide the following additional information: "Provide a list of subdivisions (not on a corridor or in a PUD) that are impacted by non-residential zoning/development, including non-residential uses fronting residential streets:" Subdivision Adjacent Non-residential Use or Zoning Kirkwood Hollow (MTP) American Aquatics, 2929 N. White Chapel Blvd. (SP-2) City of Southlake ("COS")Water Tower, N. White Chapel & Dove Rd. (CS) Shadow Creek, Old Orchard, R.P.Estes Nonconforming Uses on French Circle (AG) Huntwick Est. & Quail Creek Est. Carroll Middle School l 1C� 3 City of Southlake, Texas Subdivision Lonesome Dove Est. & Emerald Est. Adjacent Non-residential Use or Zoning Lonesome Dove Baptist Church (CS) Res. Areas SW of E. Dove and N. Carroll Tree House Childhood Center, 2210 N. Carroll (C-2) Royal Oaks,Twin Creeks,E. Dove Res.Area Unity Church of NE Tarrant County, E. Dove Road (CS) Meadowmere & E. Dove Area Yates Corner, (SP-2 & C-2) E. Dove Res. Area SWC at E. Dove & N. Kimball Ave (C-2) The Hill & E. Highland Res. Area Menasco, N. Kimball Ave. (B-1) Whispering Dell Est., Highland Est.,Oaks Johnson Elem., Carroll Intermediate (CS) E. Highland & N. Carroll Res. Areas Highland Meadows Montessori School & Pleasant Hill Advent Christian Church (CS); Lot 4,Chivers Park (C-3) Ravenaux Place, Burnett Acres, Res. on Ravenaux Village W. Highland Peck Addition The Clariden School, 1325 N. White Chapel Blvd. (CS) W. Highland Res. Area Barbara Paty's 1 ac. ((C-1) Chapel Downs and Summerplace Addn. Southlake Assembly of God Church (CS) Sandlin Estates, Oak Hill Est.,W. Highland Durham Elem. (CS) & Proposed School Site (Kasper Res. Area Property) Sword Addition (Randol Mill Ave.) Brewer Addn., Ridgewood Addn. 2 Res. Lots in Sword Addn. COS Water Tower south of Florence Rd. Father Joe Addn,Timberline Est, DrakeEst. Catholic Diocese Property (N. of Johnson Rd.) (CS) Low Density Residential Area S. of Johnson Road Oak Hill Est./Evans Property N. Kimball/Shady Lane Res. Area Oak Tree Est. Florence Elementary School (CS) Bicentennial Park (CS) St. Laurence Episcopal Church (CS) Miron Addn (SP-2 & B-1 Properties) Woodland Heights 0-1 Property (Willan Property) j j ('A City of Southlake, Texas Subdivision Adjacent Non-residential Use or Zoning Timarron Addn & Versailles Addn. First Baptist Church of SL, 940 S. Carroll (CS) Timarron Addn.& East Haven MH area I-1 Property, south of E. Continental Blvd., (i.e., Metro Pool Chemical) Res. Area W. of S. White Chapel Blvd. Southlake Feed & Tack (C-1) Monticello,Timarron,&Adams Addn. C-1 lot at SWC of S. White Chapel & W. Continental Blvd. Country Walk,Air Park Est, Continental Carroll Elementary School (CS) Park Low Density Res. Area (S. Pearson Lane) St.Martin-in-the-Field Episcopal Church (CS) & B-1 property North of Snow's Gymnastics (in-house for rezoning) Timarron (CV & SL) Industrial properties along Brumlow Ave. Cambridge Place Addn. Industrial properties in Greenlee Bus. Park (S. Kimball) Woodsey/Timberline MH area Industrial properties along E. Continental Blvd. Ken Smith's property along Crooked Lane Commerce Business Park (I-1) Of the listed residential subdivisions/areas, it appears that only Woodland Heights and East Haven Addition have non-residential development (fronting residential streets) at the entry to their residential subdivisions. "Determine the appropriate method of measurement (distance) between the residential and non- residential properties." Because this ordinance is on the leading edge in establishing protection for residential development, there were no research source documents to consult on this issue. There were members of the Commission as well as large -parcel developers which stated that the "property -line -to -property -line" method would be onerous to their development and that the method would impede the overall objective of aesthetically pleasing design. They recommended that the measurement be from the residential property line to the non- residential structure. "Provide a definition of a residential street (non -arterial) " For the purpose of this section, a residential street shall be defined as a local street - residential as further described in the Master Thoroughfare Plan. Excerpt from the Thoroughfare Plan: City of Southlake, Texas "ROADWAY CLASSIFICATION DEFINITION CLASSIFICATION: Local Street - Residential Street or Cul-de-sac FUNCTION: Provide direct access to residences and provide internal circulation within neighborhoods. Adjacent pedestrian movement should be considered. TRIP LENGTH: Short, generally %2 mile or less SYSTEM CONTINUITY: Should connect only to collectors. Direct connection between residential streets and arterials should be discouraged. LAND USE INTERACTION: Provides direct access to adjacent property ACCESS MANAGEMENT: None INTERSECTION TREATMENT: None MEDIAN TREATMENT: None" If you have any questions pertaining to the proposed ordinance, please feel free to contact me at extension 743. gAord\neighbor\dft9bmem.5 j 1 aTEL No. Oct 16.95 15:42 No.009 P.02 FIELDING, BARRM & TAYLOR, L LP. ATP S 400 3HANKONB'ONH'MWBR tVKT WORirK TEWAs 76102-MI y'M_M 1ON8 (d17) 337r21W (600) 31A-3400 FAX (817) 33Z-4740 WATMi K OLSON October 16, 1995 VIA FAX and REGULAR MAIL Mr. Greg Last Director of Community Development City of Southlake 667 North Carroll Avenue Southlake, Texas 76092 RR Neighborhood Preservation Ordinance No. 480-Q. Draft No.. 9b Dear Gres: I have reviewed Draft No. 9b of the Neighborhood Preservation Oxftance which was faxed to me on October 13, 199S. I ,am faxing a copy- of this draft showing some of my comments. In addition, I would 10ce to make the following comments: First, to address your question in your October, 10, 1995 memorandum, I do not believe that the "cumulative clause" is in conflict with Section 37.1, Paragraph 2. To the contrary, it is -my interpretation of Section 37.1, Paragraph 2, that different provisions in other ordinances will not be deemed to be in conflict with this Ordinance because the more stringent standard will apply. Section 37.3; Paragraph 5, provides performance standards for waste collection and disposal and deliveries. These standards provide that "developments shall ensure" that disposal and deliveries not occur between the hours of 10:00 pm. and 7:00 a.m. 1 am not clear on how a development is supposed to ensure this. Is it the intent of the City to write tickets if trash disposal or deliveries occur between these prohibited hours. L�a{a1.it�e�1a�«z�ie��s2 0 TEL No. Oct 16.95 15:42 No.009 P.03 (VjW might If so, we want to reword this paragraph to simply prohibit disposal and delivery between these hours. Also, in this regard, I remind you of A11en Taylor's comments regarding interstate commerce in his letter to Curtis Hawk dated September 12, 1995. Section 37.3, Paragraph 6, sets forth {oof requirements. In the event that these roof requirements would cause the height of the structure to exceed the maximum height permitted, a mansard roof system may be utilized. , Is this within he discretion developer, if not we Should change the word may to shalt• Also, happens if the mansard roof is not compah'ble with the roof systems of the majority of single family residential properties. What We of roof is required. in this instance? Also in this paragraph, on lint 36, the highest point of the mansard roof shall meet the height of the ma jorlty of single story dwellings within the control distance. What does shag meet mean? Does it mean it shall not be higher than? Does it mean that it shall be exactly tho average? Section 37.3, Paragraph 7a, states that front and.side yards shall be equivalent to single family front and side yards but not less than the front and side yards required in the underlying zoning district. Is it possible that a particular property might be located in the corridor overlay zone which would also require a greater front or side yard set back. I do not interpret the corridor overlay zone as being an undefying zoning district. Also, on pages 5 and 6 of the Ordinance, I have underlined different terminologies applicable to new structures which are intended to be regulated. The different terms .utilized include "structure subject to this regulation," 'structure to be - regulated," "regulated structure," non -single family residential structure," and "project." We may want to take one, last look at the ordinance to ensure that these terms are compatible. I know that my comments are some what last minute, but I just couldn't resist. If you would like to discuss the Ordinance further, please give me a call. WKO(ds W. Curtis Hawk e\riles\.rate\Ieetas\tau.32 M Very truly yours, 01k64V1t--- Wayne K. Olson . IlC-�; FIELDING, BARRETT & TAYLOR, L.L.P. ATTORNEYS 3400 RANK ONE TOWER 500 THROCKMORTON STREET �r ' FORT WORTH, TEXAS 76102-3821 TELEP14ONE (817) 332-2580 i �F (800) 318-3400 3 $EP 1 4 ttloj FAX (817) 332-4740 €L OFF.W E. ALLEN TAYLOR, JR. September 12, 1995 Mr. Curtis Hawk City Manager City of Southlake 667 N. Carroll Avenue Southlake, Texas 76092 Re: Ordinance No. 480-Q-Neighborhood Preservation Development Regulations Draft Number 8 Dear Curtis: (41W, I have just reviewed a copy of Draft No. 8 of the Neighborhood Preservation Development Regulations which Greg Last was kind enough to forward to my office for information and review. I have reviewed the proposed language changes that the staff has redlined for inclusion in this version and I do not find any of them that, on their face, create any unusual problems with minor exceptions that I will discuss below. The changes are mostly to simplify language or clarify situations that might require administrative interpretation. I am concerned with the proposed change in Section 37.2, entitled "Definitions" where we are presenting definitions of the concept of "risible." I hope that we are not suggesting a disjunctive submission of multiple definitions of the same relatively simply concept. I would suggest that we come up with one clear definition and utilize that to avoid any interpretative difficulties. I have also noted that we have added a provision to Section 37.3 under Subheading 5, that would preclude deliveries between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. I would really prefer not to place this restriction within the ordinance if at all possible. We are right on the brink of moving out of the area of local land use regulation and into a possible infringement in the area of interstate commerce. The problem rarely arises but when it does it is a chasm out of which we may not be able to crawl. Small retail operations do not get deliveries during the hours inquestion. The only types of entities that receive late night delivery are very large chains type retail centers that may be receiving the distribution of I1&q ) % Mr. Curtis Hawk September 12, 1995 Page 2 products from central warehouse points. It would be far better to negotiate on a case -by - case basis with entities of that type to resolve any possible noise conflict than to try and develop a "boiler plate" regulation that would attempt a generic preemptive fix. If the city council felt that it was absolutely essential to control these types of activities it would be far safer to do it with a stand alone noise abatement ordinance that simply made any activity that created noise above a certain decibel level illegal if it occurred during certain fixed hours. We may be able to defend the language as written but it is the one element of the Neighborhood Preservation Regulations that I would really, really like to avoid testing in a courtroom. If I can provide you with any additional information or assistance relative to this matter, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, av, j 4 E. Allen Tayl , Jr. EAT/ds f.\fi1es\s1ake\1etters\haw1L050 cc: Mr. Greg Last A A RESPONSES RECEIVED ON NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION ORDINANCE MUNSCH HA.RDT KOPF HARK & DINAN, P.C. 4000 Fountain Place 1445 Ross Avenue Dallas, Texas 75202-2790 (214).855-7500 Fax (214) 855-7584 MEMORANDUM TO: City Council of Southlake, Texas FROM: Richard W. Wilhelm DATE: October 16, 1995 SUBJECT: Neighborhood Preservation Ordinance Writer's Direct Dial No. (214) 855-7552 I have had an opportunity to: review the proposed Ordinance from the viewpoint of a citizen, n advisor -to the economic development efforts in our City, and as an attorney representing (W�umerous types of clients (including retail users), though I represent no one on this matter. I find generally that -the Ordinance has very little to do with preserving a• neighborhood (for it can- be a "neighborhood"" of one:house which brings the additional requirements -on potential users) and a lot to do with someone's efforts -to -make this City into a homogeneous array of buildings - lacking any ability to be innovative, different, unique or cost conscious. My thoughts are grouped into two .areas; overall and specific. A. Overall 1. All vacant property along 1709 appears to be affected. Significant strips of land along Carroll and along the northern and southern sides of the Mobil and Maguire Thomas tract are now also limited in their construction. It does not make any sense to have a home, presently in a commercial area, affect the construction now, when after it is.gone, this Ordinance will not be applicable. Similarly, I fail to see how a project which is across the street and behind significant landscape buffers also adversely affects the "preservation' of the neighborhood. 2. This Ordinance sets as the standard for architectural compatibility throughout :.this City,. that of the home builder. An individual planning the design of a home and an individual planning the design of a retail or office facility have some, but not many of the same goals. This Ordinance mandates a city of homogeneity. The interesting result occurs, of course, when the area is across from a group of mobile homes (like at the corner of Carroll N City Council of Southlake, Texas October 16, 1995 Page 2 and 114). 3. This Ordinance does not consider that the needs of a retail establishment differ from those of a homeowner. 4. This Ordinance will require national chains or local franchisees to modify "their look" to suit our City's particular ideas. I seriously doubt that these proven establishments will significantly modify their plans to meet your desires - therefore, we lose the opportunity to enjoy them. 5. The Ordinance eliminates or significantly limits architectural concepts. 6. This Ordinance fails to address the issue of non -conformity. What happens if a building, now. non -conforming because of the passage of this Ordinance, but still conforming to the base zoning, is destroyed? Will the City require reconstruction.pursuant to the new standards? What happens if sufficient funds .are not available because of increased costs in meeting. the Ordinance requirements? 7. This Ordinance gives no . effect to the mitigation. of the : impact by uses intervening between the residential property and the back of the 400 foot long conformity zone. 8. This Ordinance requires that a home across from a larger, developing center disrupts the continuity of a planned and designed area. 9. It appears that this is another way of obtaining that which you elected to waive in the Corridor Ordinance. Specific 11 How was the 400 foot distance determined? based on a factual study? Is it an arbitrary number or is it 2. What happens if the land use is currently residential, but it is not zoned to allow such uses? What happens if it is not residential, but there is a change to residential - would nearby buildings be required to meet the Ordinance while existing buildings don't? 3. Section 37.3(1) conflicts with the masonry ordinance which now affects these commercial buildings. Why should this be required when no homes are required to be 80% masonry and why does it limit the choices from those given in the masonry ordinance? City Council of Southlake Texas October 16, 1995 Page 3 4. In Sec. 37.3(2) why have a height limitation? This is already covered by the zoning ordinance - which controls in the event of a conflict? Given an adequate buffer and proper zoning why should these limits be imposed? For example, why should a building across 1709 from•a residential property be limited in height by this Ordinance? Why should a property which is buffered by (a) additional uses backing up to existing homes, and (b) separated from those homes by a city street; be limited in height by this Ordinance? Team 5• Why is the trash receptacle so far fmm the ro establishments, for parking and ease of pick-up, Peet line. Most p� upp , prefer the receptacles to be in corner areas. 6. An.8' masonry screening wall is a structure which will have a significant cost for engineering and materials. 7. What if trash is picked up in the residential areas prior to of after the times .dictated in the Ordinance? Does the City's contract with the trash hauler have similar prohibitions? 8. The roof requirements in Sec. 37.3(6) () are expensive, vague and do not contemplate the needs of a retail user. Who -measures the pitch -of the homes in the control area; who defines what materials are to be used (asphalt, concrete, tile, fiberglass, wood); how long .will this process take; where will the retail use place its HVAC and other equipment since it cannot place them on a slanted roof? 9. The parking limitations in Sec. 7(b) will eliminate most retail and consumer oriented businesses. 10. The "no visibility of merchandise" requirement in Sec. 7(c) will eliminate most retail businesses. Those who do build, will be constructing a safe haven f6r crime for many studies have shown that the more open and viewable a business is, the lower the crime rate is. 11. Do the window and door requirements meet the UBC requirements? I find few retail establishments which are constructed in this manner. 12. The variance procedure is non-existent because of the requirement for hardship or unique practical difficulty. The City should be able to waive these requirements for any reason - this is n9t an issue coming before the ZBA. which is governed by a set of rules and laws. The City has the power, at the time of the hearing, to make any exceptions it wishes to the Ordinance. j[C-1q �Mwty Council of Southlake ,Texas October 16, 1995 Page 4 Thank you for your time in allowing me'to comment. Regrettably, I feel that the concerns of some taxpayers are washing away the rights of other taxpayers (those who own the lands directly . affected by this Ordinance) and significantly and materially limit this City ability to attract new, non residential taxpayers. To make it less attractive and more expensive to do business in Souddake will have a profound, negative effect in the City's fiscal future. Perhaps you believe that the architectural monotony will bring pleasing esthetic effects; but the growth will slow and the tax bills will rise and we will have little sales tax strength to look to. Then, the same people who demand this "tasteful" Ordinance, will vilify you because of the tax increases. Perhaps you feel that today's problems are best dealt with now with little or no regard for -the future of our City. The running of the City must be a balance between many demanding forces; unfortunately I believe that this Ordinance, as written, tips that balance and will have damaging effects for years to come. U:\USR\RWII-HELM\ORDfN.MEM I r%v\v:js 10/16/95 W. EDWARD WALTS H. P.C. (214) 651-4510 STRASBURGER & PRICE, L.L.P. ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS w F4ITMEK SNN 1KCLVOXIG MO/ESSgNwt CONPOIIwT10Ns SUITE 4300 901 MAIN STREET DALLAS, TEXAS 75202 (214) 651-4300 TELECOPIER (214)65i-4330 October 17, 1995 Ms. Karen Gandy VIA COURIER City of Southlake 667 N. Carroll Avenue Southlake, Texas 76092 Re: Neighborhood Preservation Ordinance Dear Karen: AUS TIN SUITE 2600 600 CON ES5 AVENVE AUSTIN,TEKAS 76701-3268 (S12)-.0-3600 t O U S TO N SUITE 2e00 1221 M KINNCV STREET NOUSTON, TEXAS 77040 (713) YS/- 6600 MEXICO CITY COIFICIO MEWLETT-PACKARO MONTE N PCLVOUX O. NI. "ISO S LOMAS OE CMAPULTCPEC 41000 MCXK:O O. F..MC XICO 011-s2s-202-e790 I have reviewed the proposed Ordinance 480-Q which is being considered by the City Council this evening and I have a question about the proposed ordinance. Section 37.3 speaks of the ordinance being applicable to "all developing properties". Maguire/Thomas Partners - Westlake/Southlake Partnership may have some -lots in the commercial development which -might be 5, 10,15, 20 acres or more in size .. Assuming that the 400 foot "control distance" affected only a portion of one .of .these- lots.,. for example; .if there was a 10 acre lot and the 400 foot control distance affected 1/2 an acre. of this -lot, then would the entire ordinance with all of its restrictions apply to the remaining 9 1/2 acres or would "all developing properties" apply only to the'1/2 acre within the control distance. Obviously, if the neighborhood preservation ordinance -applied to the other 9 1/2 acres in my hypothetical, then, irrespective of the fact that the property might be zoned to. permit six story office buildings, -the City could arguably limit the *height. of any building to -two stories on the remaining 9` 1/2 acres and could.require that the office building be constructed to look like a single family residence. If, on the other hand, the limitations and. height and architectural appearance apply to the structures within the control distance and -not to the remainder of the. lot, then this should not generally pose a problem. We .hope this point can be clarified tonight. Very truly yours, Zt5� WEW: j kf cc: F. Maureen Duffy, Esq. VIA TELECOPY Mr. Tom Allen VIA TELECOPY QW Mr. Tony Canonaco VIA TELECOPY 33517.1/SP3/JKF/1652/101795 IIC--/-4 , >lU/17/US 11JE 15:5z FAX 817 430 8750 MAGUIRE THOKAS PARTNERS U002 Nnw VWII%, C5M,,, euka 500 'WWUake TY, 76G262 8171,30-0303 A October 17,. 1995 VIA FAX Q Mr. Greg Last a ' Community Development Director �c3 CITY OF SOt7Tr LASE_ R-c 667 N. Carroll Ave. Southlake, Texas 75029 Re: Draft No. 9 of Ordinance 480-Q Dear Greg. As we discussed earlier, Solana's owners are concerned with the possible inconsistency between provisions of the Corridor Overlay District and the provisions of proposed Ordinance 480-Q, the Neighborhood Preservation Ordinancce. The 114 Corridor Overlay District pmvides for basic setback requirements, including substantial setbacks from residential .property, extensive development regulations which require high quality design, architecture and constra,cction, and a shared community goal of H&' quality cammerdal development along Highway 114 as it passes flirough Soutblake. We have supported the Overlay District as it evolved from the initial consultant study through Ordinance passage_ It is possible that the language contained in Section 37.1, which appears to exclude the Corridor 0miay Zone from these regulations, should give us comfort regarding our future office bu Ming plans. However, we wish to express our concern - Proposed Oz dinaum 480-Q would require that bWWings located within 400 feet of residential properties be designed and constructed much like single family homes on large lots. These type buildings would be inconsistent with the Class A, larger floor -plate, multi -story corporate buildings which we contemplate for Solana and which the Corridor Overlay Zone contemplates for the Highway 114 Corridor. iiC`►�; t . ,l0/17/95 TiJE 15:53 FAX 617 430 8750 MAGUIRE T1109AS PARTNERS Q003 Mr. Greg Last October 17, 1995 Page 2 The separation of these corporate -style buildings from the proposed Solana residential property has been a critical planning issue- The planned use of natural barriers, construct, screening and generous buffer areas create proper separation of these important properly types - In a separate letter, Hd Walts has voiced another concern, that being the possibility that this proposed ordi wnce could be interpreted to affect any commercial lot (vs- commercial budding) within 400 feet of residentially zoned land. In summary, we are concerned that, as currently written, proposed Ordinance 480-Q could be interpreted to disallow buildmP which would be otherwise .developable under 0-2 zoning, anal which are planned (and. critically important, for Solana and Soutlil,ake- I hope you will share these concerns with both the city staff and city counsel as the Ordinance comes forward for consideration. We would urge, at the least, a re -write to specifically =dJ.ude the Highway 114 Overlay District from the proposed ordinance. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, t F ce: Tomas Allen Tony Canonaco. A WILLIAM B. KEMP 400 SOUTI R DGE LAKES PKWY. SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS 76092 (817) 329-6015 December 10,1995 City Council City bf Southlake 667 North Carroll Avenue Southlake, Texas 76092 Dear Councilmembers: 0EG'.1.41995 I understand that you will be considering the neighborhood preservation ordinance at a meeting to be held on .December, 14. I am providing the following comments for your consideration at that meeting and subsequent meetings on this important issue. A comprehensive neighborhood preservation ordinance is essential if we are to maintain the semi -rural character of Southlake that a clear majority of citizens desires. This ordinance must not be watered down so as to represent a "compromise" with the developers. The interests of the residents of (WWI Southlake must be the primary objective. The October 10,1995 draft (Draft) states in section 37.1 that the Corridor Overlay Ordinance requirements take precedence over the neighborhood preservation ordinance. My recollection is that the Corridor Ordinance was drafted so that properties a substantial distance from the ROW would be subject to it.. See section 43.5. This precedence provision may create situations that I do not believe are desirable.. For example, the flat roofed building on Westwood near FM 1709 would be acceptable under. the Corridor Ordinance but would not be acceptable under- the Draft. This building is essentially part of a residential neighborhood and should have been required to have a sloped, residential type roof. Its location, however, may cause it to be subject. to the Corridor Ordinance and not the neighborhood preservation ordinance. This precedence issue should be further considered and its implications fully understood and intended. The definition of "visible" in section 37.2 of the Draft should be modified to be more comprehensible. Possibly an example would be useful. It seems to lack a frame of reference. Section 37.3.2 of the Draft provides that the height of a building is limited to 2 1/2 stories or 35 feet. However, in the Corridor Ordinance a limit of as low as Page 1 I IC-11 one story or 20 feet is contained in section 43.11. The height limitations of the (60,w- Draft should be at least as strict as the Corridor Ordinance. Section 37.3.3 of the Draft contains restrictions on lighting. More objective standards are set forth in the Corridor Ordinance at section 43.12(a). If the Corridor Ordinance provisions are considered to be more strict that those in the Draft, then the Draft should be modified to incorporate the Corridor Ordinance standards. Section 37.3.4 does not address the issue of trash receptacles in front or side yards. I suspect that all the deed restrictions in Southlake subdivisions prohibit trash receptacles in front or side yards. Should not similar provisions be included in the Draft,. if the purpose is to conform development to residential standards? Section 37.3.7(b) and (c) contain the phrase "If the regulated structure is oriented the same as the single family residential property." There is no need to limit the requirements of those provisions to that limited situation. The impact on the neighborhood would be the same regardless of the commercial building's orientation. This phrase should be deleted from both sections. 'Section 37.4(1)(b) provides that.a variance -can be obtained if the applicant believes the ordinance would impair the architectural design or creativity of (W the project:. I don't understand why this provision is included. The very purpose of an ordinance of -this nature is to impose certain architectural design standards. A variance should not be granted just because a developer wants to do something different. The March 31, 1995 draft (Prior Draft) of the neighborhood preservation ordinance provided in section 37.4(A) that buildings subject to the -ordinance . shallbe subject to the same lot coverage requirements. This provision has been deleted from the draft. Our objective is to assure that development next. to neighborhoods is harmonious and complementary with the residential - properties. Lot coverage requirements are a key. element in achieving this objective. The lot coverage requirement should be the same as that permitted in the "SFAA' Single Family Residential District. The Draft fails to address several issues that were addressed in the Corridor Ordinance. The facade articulation requirements do not apply. The point of facade articulation in the Corridor Ordinance was that Southlake residences are characterized by extensive facade articulation: This neighborhood characteristic clearly should be included in a neighborhood preservation ordinance. The Draft fails to include any landscaping standards. Southlake residential (4aw, properties are also characterized by extensive landscaping. A neighborhood Page 2 I ! L26 preservation ordinance should incorporate such requirements just as the Corridor Ordinance did in the context of commercial development on major roadways. The Draft does not contain any provisions regarding noise abatement. This issue was addressed in. the Corridor Ordinance. The provisions of the Corridor Ordinance should be analyzed to determine is they would be strict enough in a neighborhood preservation context and appropriate language should be included in the Draft.- ,Runk you for your efforts in considering this important ordinance. The long term effects of this ordinance cannol,be overemphasized. Failure to address this issue adequately could be an important factor in Southlake becoming like north Dallas. Sincerely yours, William IY Kemp w- cc Greg Last A Page 3 IC -A S. December 11, 1995 Mr. Greg Last Community Development Director City of Southlake 667 N. Carroll Ave Southlake, TX 76029 T I M A R R O N RE: Ordinance 480-Q Neighborhood preservation Ordinance Dear Greg: After reviewing the information you sent me regarding the referenced ordinance, I can appreciate the effort and time the city staff the planning and zoning commissioners and concerned citizens of Southlake have spent on this document. As a member of the "Corridor Overlay Ordinance" Task Force, I understand the time and committment it takes to see a document of this nature evolve and can truly appreciate the intentions behind this ordinance. As Manager of Development , for one of Mobil with "Preserving Ind's most successful residential developments, I'm also concerned p g end protecting" the image and values of a community, yet allowing it to grow successfully and evolve with time. Regarding the actual contents of the ordinance, I feel that in general, the document greatly limit architectural creativity. Furthermore, it discourages quality users with unique architectural styles from entering the city. Other items of concern are as follows: I. Requiring Eadstzng Residential architectural styles (some 20-30 years old) to control "non-residential" development of the 1990's and 2000's is very restrictive and controlling. 2. The Control Distance of 400 feet is arbitrary and unclear as to how it will be measured. Furthermore, this requirement should not apply within the SH 114 corridor, because the separation issue was dealt with in the "Corridor Overlay Ordinance". 3. The Exterior Finish requirement of 80% coverage of brick or stone is excessive. The existing masonry ordinance sufficiently addresses this issue. 4. The Maximum Height requirements are covered under the existing zoning ordinances. Again, depending on the proximity of the residential property controlling the "non-residential" development, this requirement could confusing and restrictive. be very l A -2- 5. '"The Exterior lighting should not project onto We adjoining property", concerns me. Again, it depends on how proposed improvements and existing structures are oriented; will cause much confusion. 6. Waste Collection and Disposal will be dictated by the user with some attempt by the City to control. In some cases, businesses are cleaned at night after working hours. How will this be dealt with? 7. The Roof Requirements are vague and do not consider the needs of the retail user. I am concerned that homes built twenty and thirty years ago could be controlling modern architecture Don't hinder the architect's/developer ability to be creative and innovative. Finally, as Chairman of the Timarron Architectural Review Committee, I sympathize with the staff member who has to determine roof pitch, materials and, ultimately, monitor this requirement. Most assuredly, additional staff will be required for this purpose. 8. Under the Location Section (7), the requirements, as I interpret them, will discourage retail and could force the developer to "side" or "back" the proposed structure to the residential, road. Furthermore, setback lines for large one to four acre residential lots may be excessive for a small (half acre) non-residential site. (Need to think this through more, or maybe I just don't understand!) In summary, the original intent of those who felt the need to "preserve and protect residential neighborhoods from the adverse effects of adjoining non -single family residential uses", appear to be creating a document that .is not only difficult to understand for those of us that are involved in the community, but sends a very negative message out to those looking to come in. I truly believe that if the City Council feels a need to "preserve and protect" their constituents' invesrments, then simple modifications and use of existing ordinances will suffice. "In this case more isn't better." Sincerely, rf).Steve Yetts, P.E. Director of Development cc R.L.Croteau A.C. I;reemmn Southlake Chamber of Commerce P.O. Box 92668, Southlake, Texas 76092 Metro (817) 481-8200 Fax (817 329-7497 SOUTHLAKE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the City of Southlake has proposed legislation to preserve and protect existing and planned residential neighborhoods within the City entitled "Neighborhood Preservation Ordinance Draft No. 9b;" and WHEREAS, the proposed legislation is deemed restrictive and threatening by certain commercial development concerns and individuals, not the least is they believe that the future commercial attractiveness of the City of Southlake will be significantly and adversely impacted; and WHEREAS, sufficient legislative and governmental review processes currently exist in the form of the Corridor Overlay Zone requirements, Planning and Zoning Commission reviews and City Council readings; and WHEREAS, interpretation by prospective businesses of the conflicting and redundant requirements of the Neighborhood Preservation Ordinance and corridor Overlay Zone will be difficult, with subsequent delays in new project development while attempting to comply, as well as burdensome administrative impacts for the City of Southlake and Planning and Zoning representatives; and WHEREAS, the Neighborhood Preservation Ordinance does not appear to understand or differentiate between commercial/retail business interests and needs and residential interests by, in fact, insisting upon a residential appearance and architectural perspective for commercial development; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Southlake Chamber of Commerce strongly supports and endorses high -quality commercial development in the City of Southlake, but opposes the adoption of the proposed legislation of the Neighborhood Preservation Ordinance for, among other things: f 1. The threat to future commercial development and consequent unfavorable impact to the future fiscal well-being of the City of Southlake; and 2. The adoption of further restrictive requirements when sufficient legislation and review processes already exist within the City of Southlake and Planning and Zoning Commission to address the concerns that the Neighborhood Preservation Ordinance purports to further protect. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Southlake Chamber will not support or endorse revisions or rewriting of the proposed ordinance, believing it to be unnecessary to govern or control future commercial/retail development. zz,,� Soul lake Clianiber & on nercc President Date comparison o f ordinances (corridor overlay) �.- and 480-Q, (Neighborhood: Preservation) 480 S. Corridor Overlay 43.9 c., 1., (a) Masonry Requirements. All buildings must meet the masonry requirements as set out in Ordinance No. 557 as amended. However, on facades which are visible from SH 114, Carroll Avenue between SH 114 and FM 1709, FM 1709, FM 1938 and adjacent ROW and/or from property within 400' zoned residential or designated as low or medium density residential on the Land Use Plan, such masonry requirements shall exclude the use of cement, concrete tilt wall and other masonry materials of similar characteristics. In addition, the use of standard concrete block shall be limited to 10% of any facade visible from adjacent public ROW; and stucco or plaster shall only be allowed when applied using a 3-step process over diamond metal lath mesh to a 7/8th inch thickness or by other process producing comparable stucco finish with equal or greater strength and durability specifications. 43.9 c., 1., (b) Njo-hanical Equipment Screening: All buildings must igned such that no mechanical equipment (HVAC, e or satellite dishes shall be visible from SH 114, Carroll Avenue between SH 114 and FM 1709, FM 1709 and FM 1938 and adjacent ROW and/or from property 400' of a property line of a tract zoned residential or designated as low or medium density residential on the Land Use Plan. This shall include equipment on the roof, on the ground or otherwise attached to the building or located on the site. 43.9 c., 1., (g) and (g) i. Height: Same as in underlying zoning. Buildings adjacent to or across the street from residential zoning (or an area designated for low or medium density residential in the Comprehensive Land Use Plan) shall meet the standards for height regulations as outlined in Section III herein. Village Center: All properties which are located within the Village Center shall be further limited in height to the underlying zoning district or maximum elevation of 710 (National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929), %ownever is lower. 480-Q. Neighborhood Preservation 37.3 1. Exterior Finish: All structures shall have an exterior finish of brick or natural stone covering a minimum of eighty percent (801/o) of the area of each facade excluding doors and windows. 37.3 8. Mechanical Equipment Screening: All buildings must be designed such that no roof -mounted mechanical equipment (HVAC, etc.) or satellite dishes in excess of eighteen inches (18") shall be visible (as defined herein). Ground -mounted mechanical equipment and satellite dishes in excess of eighteen inches (18") shall be screened by a wooden or masonry fence or by landscaping material to a height one foot higher than the object being screened. 37.3 2. Maximum Height: All structures shall not exceed the maximum height permitted in the "SF -IA" Single Family Residential District. ItC��1 43.12 a., i. and ii. S "` over Lighting: No use or operation shall produce r indirect illumination across a residential property linetom a source of illumination nor shall any such light be of such intensity as to create a nuisance or detract from the use and enjoyment of adjacent property. A nuisance shall be defined as more than two -tenths (0.2) of one foot candle of light measured at the property line. 43.9 c., 2., (d) Trash Receptacles: Trash receptacles shall be four sided with a gate and located outside bufferyards, and to the side or rear of the principal building. They shall be screened by a minimum 8 foot solid masonry screen and shall utilize similar masonry materials to the principal structure. 43.10, 43.11 Residential adjacency standards: Setbacks Setback of Non-residential Structures: No non-residential building may encroach in the area above a line having a slope of 4:1 from any property line of a residentially Lty. property or a property with a low or medium residential land use designation in the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. However, a structure may be built up to within 40 feet of the residential ,property line, provided that the structure is no greater than one story or 20 feet in height. (See Exhibit 43-E for clarification.) and ... 43.9 2., (a) Building Setback: All lots within the Corridor Zone shall maintain a minimum building setback of 50 feet adjacent to SH 114, FM 1709 and FM 1938 rights -of -way and the east ROW of Carroll Avenue. All other building setback regulations shall be the same as in the underlying zoning district except as otherwise noted herein. A 37.3 3. Exterior Lighting: The exterior lighting of all structures shall operate in such a manner as to ensure that lighting patterns are directed onto the non -single family residential property and do not directly project onto adjacent single family residential property. 37.3 4. Trash Receptacles: No trash receptacles shall be allowed within fifty feet (50') of single family residential property. All structures under this section shall construct masonry screening walls around all trash receptacles. Screening walls shall be four-sided with an opaque gate and shall be a minimum height of eight feet (8'). 37.3 6., (a) Location: If the structure to be regulated is located on the same street as single family residential property and if single family residential property is within the control distance, the following shall be required: Front and Side Yards: The regulated structure shall have front and side yards equivalent to the front and side yards required for the single family residential property, but not less than the front and side yards as required by the underlying zoning district of the regulated structure. )(e^ -271 43.9 c., 2., (b) P '-g Area Restriction: No parking shall be allowed in squired bufferyard. 43.9 b., 1., (a-d) and 2. Variances: At the time of review of any required Concept Plan or Site Plan, the City Council may grant variances to the development regulations set forth in this Section. To receive a variance, the applicant must demonstrate the following: (a) A variance will reduce the impact of the project on surrounding residential properties; (b) Compliance with this ordinance would impair the architectural design or creativity of the project; (c) A variance is necessary to assure compatibility with surrounding developed properties; or (d) The proposed construction is an addition to an existing project that does not meet the requirements of this ordinance. The City Council may grant a variance by an affirmative vote of a majority of the City Council members present af ling on the matter. In order to grant a variance, the Cloneouncil must determine that a literal enforcement of the regulations will create an unnecessary hardship or a practical difficulty for the applicant; that the situation causing the unnecessary hardship or practical difficulty is unique to the affected property and is not self imposed; that the variance will not injure and will be wholly compatible with the use and permitted development of adjacent properties; and that the granting of the variance will be in harmony with the spirit and purpose of this ordinance. If a variance application is denied by the City Council, no other variance of like kind relating to the same project or proposed project shall be considered or acted upon by the City Council for a period of six (6) months subsequent to the denial. .'ROCS\ORD\FINAL\CORRMOR\480-S\COMP FNL.TWO 37.3 7., (b) Parking Limitations: If the regulated structure is oriented the same as the single family residential property, no vehicular parking shall be permitted in the area which comprises the front yard of the non -single family residential structure. 37.4 1., (a-d) and 2. Variances and appeals: At the time of review of any required Concept Plan or Site Plan, the City Council may grant variances to the development regulations set forth in this Section. To receive a variance, the applicant must demonstrate the following: (a) A variance will reduce the impact of the project on surrounding residential properties; (b) Compliance with this ordinance would impair the architectural design or creativity of the project; (c) A variance is necessary to assure compatibility with surrounding developed properties; or (d) The proposed construction is an addition to an existing project that does not meet the requirements of this ordinance. The City Council may grant a variance by an affirmative vote of a majority of the City Council members present and voting on the matter. In order to grant a variance, the City Council must determine that a literal enforcement of the regulations will create an unnecessary hardship or a practical difficulty for the applicant; that the situation causing the unnecessary hardship or practical difficulty is unique to the affected property; that the variance will not injure and will be wholly compatible with the use and permitted development of adjacent properties; and that the granting of the variance will be in harmony with the spirit and purpose of this ordinance. If a variance application is denied by the City Council, no other variance of like kind relating to the same project or proposed project shall be considered or acted upon by the City Council for a period of six (6) months subsequent to the denial. DRAFT 9b October 10, 1995 1 ORDINANCE NO.480-Q 2 3 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 480, AS 4 AMENDED, THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE 5 OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS, CREATING 6 NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION SPECIAL 7 DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS FOR NONRESIDENTIAL 8 DEVELOPMENTS WITHIN CERTAIN ZONING DISTRICTS; 9 PROVIDING THAT THIS ORDINANCE SHALL BE 10 CUMULATIVE OF ALL ORDINANCES; PROVIDING A 11 SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY 12 FOR VIOLATIONS HEREOF; PROVIDING A SAVINGS 13 CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION IN PAMPHLET 14 FORM; PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION IN THE OFFICIAL 15 NEWSPAPER; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 16 17 WHEREAS, the City of Southlake, Texas, is a home rule city acting under its charter 18 adopted by the electorate pursuant to Article XI, Section 5 of the Texas Constitution and Chapter 19 9 of the Local Government Code; and (W WHEREAS, the City of Southlake has heretofore adopted Ordinance No. 480, as amended, 22 as the zoning ordinance of the city; and 23 24 WHEREAS, the City of Southlake has historically developed as a residential community 25 which is particularly suited for the development of a quality residential lifestyle which is separated 26 from non-residential developments which might adversely impact said residential neighborhoods; 27 and 28 29 WHEREAS, several existing and planned residential neighborhoods are located adjacent to 30 properties which are developing or will be developed for business and commercial use; and 31 32 WHEREAS, the city council of the City of Southlake recognizes the vital importance of 33 residential neighborhoods and the need to preserve and protect residential neighborhoods from the 34 adverse effects of adjoining non -single family residential uses; and 35 36 WHEREAS, the city council desires to protect and enhance the attractiveness of the city to 37 visitors; to promote and stimulate the economy; to ensure the harmonious, orderly and efficient 38 growth and development of the city; to preserve property and property values; and to maintain a 39 generally harmonious outward appearance of both single family residential and non -single family 40 residential structures which are compatible and complementary; and L:IC7YDOCSIORDIDRAF7WEIGHBORIDF 9B.CLN DRAFT 9b October 10, 1995 1 WHEREAS, the city council desires to adopt this ordinance for the purpose of preserving 2 and protecting the quality of residential life of existing and future residential neighborhoods by 3 adopting reasonable regulations that will promote non-residential development that is compatible 4 and complementary with adjoining single family residential properties. 5 6 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY 7 OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS: 8 9 SECTION 1. 10 11 Ordinance No. 480, as amended, is hereby amended by adding new sections 8.6, 16.6, 17.6, 12 18.6, 19.4, 20.6, 21.6, 22.6, 23.6, 24.6, 25.6, 26.6, 27.6, 28.6, 29.6, 30.6, 31.4 and 32.4 each 13 respectively to read as follows, and by renumbering the remaining sections accordingly: 14 15 "ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS FOR PROPERTIES LYING 16 WITHIN FOUR HUNDRED FEET (400) OF SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL 17 PROPERTY" - In addition to the development regulations applicable to this district, 18 the development regulations established in Section 37 of this ordinance, shall also 19 apply. SECTION 2. 22 23 Ordinance No. 480, as amended, is hereby amended by adding new Section 37, to read as 24 follows: 25 26 SECTION 37 27 NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS 28 29 37.1 PURPOSE AND INTENT - In order to preserve and protect significant 30 architectural and cultural attributes of the City of Southlake, the City has 31 determined that it is necessary and appropriate to adopt specialized 32 regulations to prevent any detrimental impact from the location of non -single 33 family residential uses in proximity to single family residential uses. 34 35 It is the intent of this Section that the development standards set forth herein 36 shall supersede any other provision established by this ordinance or other 37 ordinances, except that when conflicting requirements are found, the more 38 stringent requirements shall apply. However, the following exception shall 39 apply: Corridor Overlay Zone requirements found in Section 43 shall take 40 precedence if there are conflicting standards in this section. PAGE 2 L:IC7YDOCSIORDI5RAFTWEIGHBORIDFI9B.CLN IIC-�C1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 oR 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 DRAFT 9b October 10, 1995 37.2 DEFINITIONS - The following definitions shall be applicable to this section. Architectural Attributes:, Means those physical features of buildings and structures that are generally identified and described as being important products of human thought and action characteristic of a population'or community. Cultural Attributes. Means all of those physical features of an area that, either independently or by virtue of their interrelationship, are generally identified and described as being important products of human thought and action characteristic of a population or community. Accordingly, the term "cultural attributes" necessarily includes "architectural attributes" as that term is defined in this section. The term "cultural attributes" does not refer to the characteristics or beliefs of people who may reside in or frequent a particular area. Single Family Residential Proms: Means any lot or tract of land upon which a single family residential home exists or any lot or tract of land with single family residential zoning or any lot or tract of land designated as low or medium density residential on the Land Use Plan. Under Construction: Means that a valid building permit has been issued by the City for construction of a single family residential dwelling. Visible: Means that the object(s) being screened can be seen from any elevation equal to the grade which is defined as the lowest point of elevation of the finished surface of the ground, paving or sidewalk when measured on a line five feet (5) from the building. 37.3 DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS: In addition to the development regulations applicable to the underlying district, the following additional development regulations shall apply to all developing properties lying within four hundred feet (400') of single family residential property measured from the property line of the non -single family residential use, hereinafter known as the "control distance." 1. Exterior Finish: All structures shall have an exterior finish of brick or natural stone covering a minimum of eighty percent (80%) of the area of each facade, excluding doors and windows. 2. Maximum Height: All structures shall not exceed the maximum height permitted in the "SF -IA" Single Family Residential District. PAGE 3 L:IC7YDOCSIORDIDRAFIWEICHBORIDF7'9B.CLN i is 3)I Dbff 9b October 10, 1995 1 2 3. Exterior Lighting: The exterior lighting shall operate in such a manner 3 as to ensure that lighting patterns are directed onto the non -single family 4 residential property and do not directly project onto adjacent single 5 family residential property. 6 7 4. Trash Receptacles: No trash receptacles shall be allowed within fifty 8 feet (50') of single family residential property. Masonry screening 9 walls shall be constructed around all trash receptacles. Screening walls 10 shall be four-sided with an opaque gate and shall be a minimum height 11 of eight feet (8'). 12 13 5. Performance Standards: 14 15 a. Waste Collection and Disposal: Developments shall ensure that the 16 disposal of and collection of solid waste, trash and other refuse into 17 trash receptacles or dumpsters does not occur between the hours of 18 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. 19 (W b. Deliveries: Developments shall ensure that deliveries made by vehicles exceeding 10,000 pounds gross vehicle weight (G.V.W.) 22 shall not be received nor dispatched between the hours of 10:00 23 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. 24 25 6. Roof Requirements: The roof systems of all structures shall be of the 26 same type (e.g., gable, hip, shed) and the same pitch (e.g., 6:12, 8:12, 27 10:12), and clad of the same materials that are found on the majority of 28 single family residential properties lying within the control distance. 29 In the event that such a roof system would cause the height of the 30 structure to exceed the maximum height as permitted, a mansard roof 31 system may be utilized provided that the mansard roof is enclosed on all 32 sides and that the pitch, height and cladding of the mansard roof is 33 compatible with the roof systems on the majority of single family 34 residential properties within the control distance. On single -story 35 structures, the highest point of the mansard roof (using the measurement 36 method established by the currently adopted Uniform Building Code) 37 shall meet the height of the majority of single -story single family 38 dwellings within the control distance. On multiple story structures, the 39 highest point of the mansard roof (using the measurement method 40 established by the currently adopted Uniform Building Code) shall meet the height of the majority of multiple story single family dwellings within the control distance. PAGE 4 c:Ic7rnocswRDIDRAFIWErcxaoRWF7YB.Cray I i L-3z) 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 L DRAFT 9b October 10, 1995 a. Insufficient Comparisons Available: In the event that single family residential property within the control distance contains fewer than three (3) residences existing or under construction or in the event that there is no majority of style of single family residential property within the control distance, the roof systems of all structures subject to this regulation shall be gable or hip with 6:12 minimum pitch and clad with composition shingles, slate or a man- made slate -like product. In the event that such a roof system would cause the height of the structure to exceed the maximum height as permitted, a mansard roof system (enclosed on all sides) may be utilized provided that the mansard roof has a pitch between 6:12 and 10:12, a minimum height of twenty-five feet (25') and is clad with composition shingles, slate or a man-made slate -like product. 7. Location: If the structure to be regulated is located on the same street as single family residential property and if single family residential property is within the control distance, the following shall be required: a. Front and Side Yards: The regulated structure shall have front and side yards equivalent to the front and side yards required for the single family residential property, but not less than the front and side yards as required by the underlying zoning district of the regulated structure. b. Parking Limitations: If the regulated structure is oriented the same as the single family residential property, no vehicular parking shall be permitted in the area which comprises the front yard of the non - single family residential structure. c. Display of Merchandise: If the regulated structure is oriented the same as the single family residential property, the regulated structure shall not display sales merchandise in windows visible from single family residential properties. d. Window and Door Requirements: All structures shall have window (e.g., single -hung, double -hung, casement, awning...) and door (e.g., flush, paneled, french...) structures similar to those that are found on the majority of single family residential property lying within the control distance. PAGE 5 L:ICTYDOCSIORDIDRAFIWEJGHBORIDF YB.CLN 1Icr33) DRAFT 9b (am., October 10, 1995 1 1. Insufficient Comparisons Available: In the event that single 2 family residential property within the control distance 3 contains fewer than three (3) residences existing or under 4 construction or in the event that there is no majority of style of 5 single family property within the control distance, window 6 structures shall be single -hung, double -hung, casement or 7 awning, and door structures shall be flush, paneled or french. 8 9 8. Mechanical Equipment Screening: All buildings must be designed such 10 that no roof -mounted mechanical equipment (HVAC, etc.) or satellite 1 I dishes in excess of eighteen inches (18") in height shall be visible (as 12 defined herein). Ground -mounted mechanical equipment and satellite 13 dishes in excess of eighteen inches (18") in height shall be screened by 14 a wooden or masonry fence or by landscaping material to a height one 15 foot higher than the object being screened. 16 17 37.4 VARIANCES AND APPEALS: At the time of review of any required 18 Concept Plan or Site Plan, the City Council may grant variances to the 19 development regulations set forth in this Section. 1. To receive a variance, the applicant must demonstrate the following: 22 23 (a) A variance will reduce the impact of the project on surrounding 24 residential properties; 25 26 (b) Compliance with this ordinance would impair the architectural 27 design or creativity of the project; 28 29 (c) A variance is necessary to assure compatibility with surrounding 30 developed properties; or 31 32 (d) The proposed construction is an addition to an existing project that 33 does not meet the requirements of this ordinance. 34 35 2. The City Council may grant a variance by an affirmative vote of a 36 majority of the City Council members present and voting on the matter. 37 In order to grant a variance, the City Council must determine that a 38 literal enforcement of the regulations will create an unnecessary 39 hardship or a practical difficulty for the applicant; that the situation 40 causing the unnecessary hardship or practical difficulty is unique to the 1 affected property; that the variance will not injure and will be wholly compatible with the use and permitted development of adjacent PAGE 6 L:ICTYDOCSIORDIDRAF7WEIGHBORIDF79B.CLN 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 N I 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 DRAFT N October 10, 1995 properties; and that the granting of the variance will be in harmony with the spirit and purpose of this ordinance. 3. If a variance application is denied by the City Council, no other variance of like kind relating to the same project or proposed project shall be considered or acted upon by the City Council for a period of six (6) months subsequent to the denial. 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. 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 if permitted to exist shall constitute a separate offense. SECTION 6. All rights and remedies of the City of Southlake are expressly saved as to any and all violations of the provisions of Ordinance No. 480, as amended, or any other ordinances affecting 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. PAGE 7 L:ICTYDOCs%oRDIDRAF wEIGHBORIDFIYB.CLN Inc-33�� 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 Duff 9b October 10, 1995 SECTION 7. The City Secretary of the City of Southlake is hereby authorized to publish this ordinance in book or pamphlet form for general distribution among the public, and the operative provisions of this ordinance as so published shall be admissible in evidence in all courts without further proof than the production thereof. SECTION 8. The City Secretary of the City of Southlake is hereby directed to publish the proposed ordinance or its caption and penalty together with a notice setting out the time and place for a public hearing thereon at least ten (10) 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 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 ,1996. U ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY PAGE 8 L:IC7YDOCSIORDIDRAF7WEIGHBORIDF7YB.CLN I IC-3 �'1 6A 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 3 DRAFT 9b October 10, 1995 PASSED AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING ON THIS DAY OF ,1996. U: •. ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY EFFECTIVE: APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: CITY ATTORNEY L:\CTYDOCS\ORD\DRAF V-4EIGHBOR\DFr9B.CLN PAGE 9 �C-37> City of Southlake, Texas MEMORANDUM October 9, 1996 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Karen P. Gandy, Zoning Administrator SUBJECT: Outside Storage Earlier this year, the Commission and the Council considered permitting outside storage by specific use permit, specificallyfor properties in the C-3 district. As you recall, this amendment was drafted to address Wal-Mart's request to place ten (10) containers (approximately 8' x 40' x 10') outside their building for the purpose of layaway storage from October 1 - December 26. This amendment (No. 480-T) failed during second reading of the ordinance on January 16, 1996. Currently, outside storage is permitted by right in the I-2 Heavy Industrial District and under certain limited conditions in other districts. Outside storage may be approved by Specific Use Permit in the I-1 Light Industrial and C-2, C-3, C-4, and B-2 Districts. Attached are the following applicable ordinance provisions, Ordinance No 480-T, (see Section 3), letters ceived from Bill Kemp and Rex Potter on Ordinance N. 480-T, and a brief, 10-city survey of how other area handle outside storage. As we look at this issue, perhaps we should consider regulations for outdoor display (a temporary condition) as well as outdoor storage (a permanent condition). Should you have questions regarding this memo or any of the attachments, please call me at (817) 481-5581, extension 743. M 01 KPG L:\CTYDOC S\ORD\DRAFT\ZONING\OUTS IDE. STO UP-1 Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager October 9, 1996 age Two ORDINANCE NO. 480 PROVISIONS. Section 22.2 (19), C-3 permitted use: "Nursery buildings for the retail sale of plants and accessory items where the sales operations are conducted entirely within an enclosed structure. Outdoor storage or sale shall be permitted with this use to the extent that the outdoor sales area is completely enclosed by a fence, wall or screening device." Section 22.2 (23), C-3 permitted use: "Plumbing and heating appliances, repair and installation services. All storage of materials must be indoors within this zoning district. " Section 22.5 (h); C-3 district regulations: "All business shall be conducted entirely within a building. Outside storage and/or display of any type shall be prohibited unless in accordance with Section 38 of this ordinance." Section 26.5 (h), I-1 district regulations: "All business shall be conducted entirely within a building unless outside storage is approved in connection with a specific use permit development site plan. (As amended by Ordinance No. 480-C.)" action 27.5 0), I-2 district regulations: "Outside storage shall be permitted in accordance with the requirements of Section 38." Section 35.8, Parking regulations: "NO REPAIR WORK - The parking area shall be used for passenger vehicles only and in no case shall it be used for sales, repair work, storage, dismantling or service of any vehicles, equipment, materials or supplies." Section 38, Outside Storage regulations: "38.1 GENERAL -Outside storage of any goods, materials, merchandise, equipment, parts, junk or vehicles not accessory to a residential use shall not be permitted except when in conformance with the following provisions and criteria. 38.2 OUTSIDE STORAGE FOR THE PURPOSE OF MANUFACTURE OR ASSEMBLY Outside storage for the purpose of outside manufacturing or fabrication (herein defined as activities such as, but not limited to, cement mixing, cutting or sawing, forging, shaping, etc.) or outside assembly of items (herein defined as such activities as nailing, bolting or screwing) shall be allowed under the following conditions: a. Such outside storage shall only be permitted in the I-2 district. b. When such outdoor storage area abuts or is visible from or lies within one hundred (100) feet of any AG or residentially zoned property: 1. There must be a bufferyard meeting the requirements of Section 42 of this ordinance of no less than fifty (50) feet in width; and 2. A solid or opaque wall or fence of wood, masonry or a combination of the two no less than eight (8) feet completely screening such outside storage shall be installed. tlb-2 Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager Uctober 9, 1996 ge Three 3. The Zoning Board of Adjustment may permit a waiver, by special exception, of the requirements for solid wall screening of outdoor storage when such storage abuts a lot or tract zoned AG. Such special exception may be approved by the Zoning Board of Adjustment as specifically authorized in Section 44.12 of this ordinance, subject to full and complete compliance with any and all conditions required in Section 44.12, together with such other conditions as the Zoning Board of Adjustment may impose. c. When such outdoor storage directly abuts an arterial thoroughfare or major collector as defined in the Master Thoroughfare Plan, then such storage area must be completely screened with a solid or opaque wall of wood, masonry or a combination of the two, which is no less than eight (8) feet in height. 38.3 OUTSIDE STORAGE FOR THE PURPOSE OF RETAIL SALES - Outdoor storage for the purpose of retail sales shall be allowed under the following conditions: a. Businesses with current certificates of occupancy may display for sale merchandise items traditionally marketed through outside storage not to exceed five (5) percent of the floor area of the business. These items shall include outdoor racks for the display and sale of newspapers, the storage and sale of bundled firewood, prepackaged ice if stored and displayed in a safe, hygienic storage bin or container, and items of a comparable nature. It is not the intent of this provision to allow the outdoor storage or display of traditional prepackaged merchandise that is normally displayed and sold within the confines of a traditional, retail establishment. Christmas tree sales are excepted from this requirement, and such trees may be stored outside for sale beginning one week before Thanksgiving and ending December 31. Items so stored outside must be displayed. in a neat and orderly manner. b. Outside storage by transient salespersons is prohibited. c. Outdoor or open storage of automobiles for the purpose of retail sales shall only be permitted by special exception.. The Board of Adjustment shall establish those screening or buffering requirements necessary and appropriate to protect adjoining properties. Screening from public streets, highways and rights -of -way shall be discretionary with the Board based upon their evaluation of the project upon surrounding land uses and the character of the development pattern in the immediate area. 38.4 OTHER OUTSIDE STORAGE a. Outside storage of items not for sale or for the purpose of manufacture or assembly shall only be permitted in the C-4, B-2 and I-2 districts. b. Such outside storage must conform to the screening and bufferyard requirements as set out in Sections 39 and 42 of this ordinance, respectively." Section 45.1 (27), Specific Use Permit: "Outside storage, subject to the requirements of Section 38. A concept plan is required. I- I" I1D-3 Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager `�ctober 9, 1996 ge Four Section 45.1(28), Specific Use Permit: "The City Council may authorize a waiver of the solid wall screen requirement for outdoor storage, only when such outdoor storage abuts a lot or tract zoned AG, and only when there is no residence on such lot or tract within five hundred (500) feet of the storage area. The City Council has no authority to waive Section 38 Screening Requirements where the outdoor storage abuts properly zoned residential. The applicant requesting a waiver of screening requirements must submit a map to the City Council showing that the outside storage area is so situated that it will not be an eyesore, and is sufficiently distanced from any residences. I-1, I-2" Section 45.1 (29), Specific Use Permits: "Outdoor storage of plants or other greenery if conducted as a portion of the retail operations of another principal use permitted within this district. This specific use permit is designed to permit the City Council to allow limited outdoor garden sales activity in conjunction with traditional retail operations subject to the establishment of safeguards deemed necessary and appropriate to protect adjoining properties. In granting a specific use permit.for this activity, the City Council is authorized to set out specialized buffering, screening, design and signage requirements to ensure that the outdoor storage, display and sale is totally compatible with the specific site and all surrounding land uses. C-2, C-3, C-4, B-2" /, : I CTYDOC'S101 UJ I D RAF71 ZONI NG IO UT S/DE. STO A 10-City Survey on Outside Storage EDFORD § 33 Definition: none District s, where permitted: S -Service Commercial, L -Light Commercial, H -Heavy Commercial, I -Light Industrial Permit: required • no residentially zoned property within 50 feet of proposed storage • limited to 3 days or less • no complaints on record for similar activities held by applicant Conditions: • no more than 50% of width of pedestrian path abutting building shall be used for storage, providing that the remaining ped. path shall contain no less than 3' • no more than 25% of linear pedestrian path abutting building of individual business shall be used to sell or store materials & merchandise without a permit (i.e. grocery carts, newspaper dispensers, ice machines, food & drink dispensers) • no storage of materials shall be allowed within 3' of required egress path • no storage of materials shall be allowed within the required Emergency Access Easement Exemptions: activities are inherent in nature of commercial and/or retail uses (exempt from permit requirements (landscape services & commercial greenhouses; stone monuments; building materials/lumber yards; motorcycle & motor scooter sales; boats & marine craft sales; farm machinery & farm implements sales; new & .used car & truck sales; motor home, camper & recreational vehicle sales; heavy construction -quipment & implements sales) 3A: • if City Manager determines ZBA approval is necessary • storage is located within 50' of residentially zoned property • event is proposed for more than 3 days • complaints on record for similar activities held by applicant COPPELL § 33 & individual districts Definition (open storage): The storage of any equipment, machines, commodities, raw„ semi -finished materials, and building materials, not accessory to a residential. use which is visible from any point on the building lot line when viewed from ground level to six feet above ground level Districts where permitted: C - Commercial; LI - Light Industrial; H-1 - Heavy Industrial Permit: none required Conditions: • confined to rear 2/3 of lot • shall not exceed 20% of lot area (C District) • 6' high screening wall shall be provided and maintained parallel to the property line adjacent to the area to be screened • if screening wall is required along a street edge, screening wall shall be located 30' from the street ROW/property line (must conform to §33-1.8). Screening may be allowed 15' behind the front property line provided that a landscape plan has been submitted and approved by the Planning Commission that clearly indicates the screening wall location. lID-S EULESS § 10 (.�efinition: none stricts where permitted: L-1 - Limited Industrial; I-1 - Light Industrial; I-2 - Heavy Industrial Permit: none required Conditions: screened from all adjacent property lines by a wall or view -obscuring fence not less than 5' in height [§ 7-602 (4)] in all districts where open storage is permitted and screening of the storage area is required, a screening wall or fence shall be provided not less than 6' in height [§ 10-103 (4)] IRVING § 52-56 Definition: the storage of commodities, goods and/or refuse outside of an enclosed building Districts where permitted: P-O - Professional Office; C-O - Commercial Office; C-N - Neighborhood Commercial; C-C Community Commercial; C-OU-1- Commercial Outdoor; C-OU-2 - Commercial Outdoor; C-OU-3 - Commercial Outdoor; C-W - Commercial Warehouse; FWY - Freeway; ML-20 - Light Industrial; ML-20a - Light Industrial; ML-40 - Light Industrial; ML-120 - Light Industrial; C-P - Commercial Park Permit: none required Conditions: • mechanical equipment no nearer than 120' to any principal building used for single-family residence (side & rear yards only for C-OU districts) • storage completely encompassed by a blind fence or wall at least 7' high, stacked no higher than 1' below the top of fence or wall (C-W, FWY, ML, C-P districts) • specifically allowed as a principal or accessory use in the zoning district it is unlawful for any person to suffer, allow, permit, conduct or maintain any outside storage on any lot or tract within the City of Irving • permitted as accessory uses elsewhere than within a front building setback and no nearer than 30' to any street ROW KELLER §§ 35.7, 35.8, & 41.2 Definition: the permanent keeping, displaying, or storing, outside a building, of any unfinished goods, material, merchandise, or equipment on a lot or tract for more than twenty-four (24) hours Definition (outside display): outside temporary display of finished goods specifically intended for retail sale but not displayed outside overnight Districts where. permitted: C - Commercial; IP - Industrial Park; LI - Light Industrial; PD - Planned Development (for outside display: R - Retail; C, LI, and PD) Permit: required for IP district Conditions: • located behind front building line • all yard setback requirements must be observed • screened with a minimum 6' fence or wall McKINNEY § 4.05(2)(f) Definition (open storage): the storage of any equipment, machinery, commodities, raw, semifinished materials, and building materials, not accessory to a residential use, which is visible from any point on the Liilding lot line when viewed from ground level to six (6) feet above ground level istricts where permitted: ML - Light Manufacturing; MH - Heavy Manufacturing; PD - Planned Development permit: none onditions: • all allowed open storage of materials, equipment, or commodities shall be screened from view from all streets materials, equipment, or commodities shall be stacked no higher than one foot below the top of the screening wall or visual barrier no open storage operation shall be located in front of the main building and no storage use shall constitute a wrecking, junk, or salvage yard, except when such is approved with development and operation standards within an MH district all open storage areas shall be screened from view of the public streets by a fence or wall (minimum height, 8% and shrubs, trees or other landscaping as approved by the building official NORTH RICHLAND HILLS § 440.E Definition: the storage of any equipment, machinery, commodities, raw or semi -finished materials, and building materials which are not within a fully enclosed building Districts where permitted: I1 - Light Industrial; I2 - Medium Industrial; C-1& C-2 - Commercial; OC - Outdoor Commercial; Permit: required for storage of stone, rock or gravel in C2, OC, I1, and I2 Conditions: • package materials displayed out of doors shall not be readily identifiable by type or product name from adjacent public streets by reason of package labels, sales tag markers, or otherwise (C-1) C display areas out of doors shall be confined to a pedestrian walkway immediately adjacent to the building housing the primary uses and shall not extend from such building a distance of more than ten feet, and shall be located wholly under a permanent part of the main business building, such as a marquee • display and/or storage of merchandise outdoors shall not exceed more than 20% of the total area of the lot PLANO § 3-900 Definition (open storage): the keeping, outside a building, of any goods, material, merchandise, or equipment on a lot or tract for more than twenty-four hours Districts where permitted: R - Retail; CE - Commercial Employment; CB-1 - Central Business l; LC - Light Commercial; LI-1 - Light Industrial 1; LI-2 - Light Industrial Permit: none required Conditions: • not to be located between the building face and the street ROW (except consumer goods in R district, i.e. firewood, mulch, top soil, soft drinks, etc.) • immediately adjacent to the building when in a retail district • observe all setback requirements • maximum height not to exceed the height of the screening provided • not exceed 10% coverage of lot area or 30% of the main building gross floor area, whichever is more restrictive, in R districts. 10% coverage shall not apply in LC district when open storage is the primary use on property. LI-1 and LI-2 districts are exempt • storage in R districts to be screened by solid wall of same type and manner of construction as main building; except when consumer goods (firewood, mulch, top soil, soft drinks, etc.) displayed do not QW, exceed four feet (4') in height when in front or adjacent to building, three feet (3') in height within pump UP-1 island, and four foot (4') wide clearance provided along public sidewalk and six foot (6') wide clearance on sidewalk around building be on asphalt or concrete surface • must be screened from view from any street and/or parking area of adjoining property (LI-1 & LI-2 screened only from street) • screening walls must be minimum of six feet in height & of masonry construction, chain link or wrought iron in combination with landscape screen, or solid landscape screen; wooden screening fences are prohibited P&Z may waive screening requirement if no public purpose would be served by construction of required screen, or natural features (i.e. vegetation or topography) exist that sufficiently screen storage RICHARDSON Articles XVI-A, XVI-B, XVII, XIX-B, XXI-D Definition: "Open Storage"- the open placement for a continuous period in excess of 24 hours of an item which is not customarily used or stored outside and which is not made of a material that is resistant to damage or deterioration from exposure to the outside environment Districts where permitted: LR-M1 - Local Retail; LR-M2 - Local Retail; C-M - Commercial; IP-M1 - Industrial Park; I -FP 1 - Industrial; I-FP2 - Industrial Permit: none required Conditions: • permitted on sidewalk adjacent to the building, provided goods shall not extend more than 3' from building and not more than 3' in height Exceptions: • Christmas trees for period not exceeding 40 days prior to Christmas merchandise dispensing units in connection with operation of open -front type of drive-in grocery store gasoline service station pump islands • storage and display of rental trailers or newspaper racks • display or storage of motor and recreational vehicles, marine equipment, agricultural implements, or heavy machinery which are offered for sale, providing such storage shall not be permitted between a frontage street and the building line (IP-M 1) WHITE SETTLEMENT § 10-204 Definition (open storage): the storage of any equipment, machinery, building materials or commodities, including raw, semi -finished and finished materials, the storage of which is not accessory to a residential use, and which is visible from ground level; provided, however, that vehicular parking shall not be deemed to be open storage Districts where permitted: I-L - Light Industrial and Warehousing; PF - Planned Freeway Permit: none required Conditions: • all manufacturing or industrial uses shall be carried on wholly within buildings or enclosures consisting of substantial screening devices behind the required front yard • no raw materials , materials or sale or manufactured products shall be stored outside the confines of buildings or enclosures no storage permitted in any required yard .CTY DOCS\OR D\D RA FRZON I NG\OUTS I D E. STO 01/02/96 07:59 $'214 330 1120 CALTEX TA.t DIV LA002 W' LLIAM B. KEMB 400 SOUTHMGS LAKES PKWY. SQUTHI.AKE, TEXAS 76092 (917) 329-6015 December 30,1995 City Council City of Southlake 667 North Carroll Avenue Soutiilake, Texas 76092 Dear Councilmembers: I am adamantly opposed to Ordinance No. 480-T, which would provide special treatment to Walmart and the Texaco at Whites Chapel I frankly am amazed that Council passed this ordinance at first reading. The citizens of SoudUake have spent substantial effort supporting the enactment of ordinances that will encourage quality development and preserve property values. The members of Council have been instrumental in this critical process. This ordinance represents a major setback to these efforts. From a procedural perspective, the ordinance was not available until December 29. It was passed at first reading without being in ordinance form. As I read the Southlake Charter, sections 3.12 and 3.13 require that proposed ordinances be introduced in the form required for final adoption Section 3.13 makes it dear that an ordinance is IntroduLed" before the.first reading. Thus if all else tails, I intend to take the position that the ordinance if adopted at the "second reading,. was adopted iIlegally. I have been advised that it is frequently the practice not to draft an ordinance until second reading. I strongly urge you to stop this practice. If an ordinance is not important enough to be prepared in final form, then it should not warrant consideration. Planning and zoning rejected this ordinances 7-0. This body, which I do not consider to be favorable to aesthetically oriented regulation, apparently -took 15 minutes for deliberation. I assumed that it would be rejected by Council and instead have been focusing my volunteer efforts in more productive areas. I understand that the ordinance was adopted at 12:30 AM and that it had been tabled twice before. This approach creates the perception that Council is not concerned about the views of the residents. An ordinance prohibiting outdoor storage is essential in order to preserve the appearance of a city. Adoption of an ordinance that carves out a particular entity from coverage by the ordinance should be undertaken only if there are overwhelming reasons therefore. Walmart has not presented those reasons. Page 1 01/02/96 08:00 %T214 830 1120 CALTEX TAT DIN" IA003 Walmart is the very store that caused the public outcry that lead to adoption of the Corridor Overlay Zone ordinance. Walmart violated the outdoor storage ordinance by bringing in storage containers as soon as the building was completed. In my opinion Walmart has failed to show any respect for the desires of Southlake residents regarding the appearance of their city. Walmart says they want to use these containers only for layaway storage. Why didn't they build the building large enough to accommodate this need? Did they not known when they built the building that they might have a need for this use? Of course they did. The ordinance was in effect long before Walmart considered Southlake for their store. They are simply trying to cheat Souddake and the school district out of real property taxes_ The Target store in Grapevine is probably the closest competitor to Walmart. Have you ever seen outdoor storage containers behind the Target? i never have. I assume that Target offers layaway to their customers, just as most stores do. Selecting Walmart for favorable treatment is arbitrary. If this exception becomes law, how do you propose to respond to the next retailer that comes to Council asking for an exception? What will be the legal basis for denying outdoor storage to a retailer with a store that is 30,000 sq. ft.? The ordinance is poorly drafted. It provides for a maximum 8 foot high fence. The containers are 8.5 feet high and you can see the tops of them as you drive east on FM 1709. Did anyone bother to measure them? Walmart only asked for permission to Have 10 containers for part of the year. The ordinance does not limit the time and appears to allow for about 30 containers. Zito citizens of Southlake will be very impressed by the sight of the tops of 30 containers as they drive down PM 1709! The second exception in Ordinance 480 T for the antenna at the Texaco station is equally unjustified. The antenna is located at the edge of the stricture so that it is clearly visible. I would assume that it could be relocated to the n*dddle of the roof and covered in a manner similar to that required by the Corridor Overlay Zone ordinance. Why did the owner not take such action when the antenna was first installed? The Corridor Overlay Zone ordinance requires screening of antennae. It was only recently enacted. Is Council now sending the message that visible antennae on commercial buildings are appropriate? All retailers will have a need to verify credit information so it won't be long until they all are coming in to Council asking for an exception. What grounds will you have to deny their requests? Continual exceptions and variances will undermine the efforts that have been made to adopt ordinances that require quality development. These exceptions and variances reflect the good old boy approach that Southlake has now outgrown. Page 2 IID-Io I urge you not to adopt this ordinance. If you intend to vote for this ordinance, I would like to have the opportunity to discuss this matter with you before the ordinance is considered at second reading. Thank you for your consideration of my concerns. Sincerely yours, William B. Kemp cr. Greg Last page 3 January 1, 1996 City Of Southlake 667 North Carroll Avenue Southlake, Texas 76092 COPY d U 4 ! , Attn: Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Dear Mayor and City Council Members: N - z Ito Y :.:31tCi iRY) % As you know, I have been appointed to various City of Southlake committees and/or commissions. As such, I must clearly state that the views I am expressing herein are my own and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of any committee or commission I am affiliated with. The City continues to make substantive strides. towards the establishment and adoption of ordinances that foster quality commercial and residential development within the City of Southlake. The establishment of a Corridor Overlay Zone with the adoption of Ordinance 480-S, the recent revisions to the .City's Sign Ordinance # 506-A, and the creation and adoption of a new Driveway Ordinance # 634, collectively demonstrate our dedication to ensuring and preserving high quality of life standards within our City. I applaud all of the volunteers, staff, Mayor, and City Council members who have contributed towards this significant accomplishment. The City Council is currently considering modifications to the Zoning Ordinance which will permit: (1) outside container storage for retailers in the "C-3" General Commercial District, and (2) certain satellite dishes as permitted uses in certain nonresidential districts rather than permit them as accessory uses. I believe the proposed ordinance modifications provide preferential treatment to the large commercial retailers, are inconsistent with citizen and City Council desires for quality development, contradict the essence and intention of the previously adopted Ordinance 480-S, and provide no value to the City or its tax base. The ordinance modifications regarding the outside storage containers were developed at the request of Wal-Mart to accommodate their "layaway" items during the Christmas holidays. As such, I would like to make the following comments: (1) Unlike most major retailers, Wal-Mart utilizes outside storage containers versus developing a warehouse system. One can imagine the eyesore development that could evolve if all commercial retailers such as Sears, Target, M. J. Design's, J. C. Pennys, etc. took this approach to warehousing. With the abundance of Wal-Mart stores in the region, it is financially viable for Wal-Mart to pursue a warehousing system for seasonal and non - seasonable merchandise while not disrupting quality development within cities. IID- 12 24 Page 2 g of 3 (2) The Southlake Wal-Mart store is relatively new. As such, Wal-Mart must have planned for the use of outside containers, knowing the City's ordinance does not allow them to do so. This is not surprising since many of our current zoning ordinances have been instigated as a result of Wal-Mart's insensitivity to Southlake citizen's desire for quality development. (3) Utilization of outside containers denies the City its much needed property tax revenue. To say "Denial of the storage containers will reduce Wal-Mart's sales and subsequent City's sales tax" is blatantly misleading and incorrect. As with any major commercial retailer, Wal-Mart will find a way to continue, or for that matter, increase its sales over time with or without its outside storage containers. It is extremely unlikely that Wal-Mart will turn away business do to lack of on -sight storage facilities. (4) Ordinance 480-S addressed various aesthetic issues such as masonry requirements, mechanical equipment screening, building facade articulation, exposed columns, landscape standards, loading area screening, etc. The proposed zoning modifications contradict the essence and intention of the Ordinance 480-S zoning regulations. No retailer will be able to effectively screen the use of outside storage containers. (5) Many of the City's zoning regulations are burdening the small commercial retail developers. These proposed zoning modifications also burden the small retailer. They give preferential treatment to the large commercial retailers with large floor square footage, thereby, causing unfair competition towards the small Southlake businessman. (6) These proposed zoning modifications open Pandora's Box on outside storage containers to other large commercial retailers such as Home Depot, Office Depot, Garden Ridge, etc. I don't believe this is what the citizens of Southlake want or need. (7) Directly south of the Southlake Wal-Mart store is land zoned for industrial use. Wal- Mart could effectively build a storage facility within close proximity to their store. This action would support Wal-Marfs needs while providing the much need property taxes to the City of Southlake. Thus far, I have predominantly addressed the proposed zoning modifications regarding outside storage containers. At this time, I would like to address the proposed zoning modifications regarding the screening of satellite dishes. It is my understanding that these modifications were developed as a result of the Magic Mike's Texaco fuel Pump issue. As such, I would like to make the following comments: NO-I3 Page 3 of 3 (1) Satellite dishes and other electronic communication devices are here to stay and will continue to experience significant growth in the future. Ordinance 480-S specifically and effectively dealt with this issue. I have seen nor heard anything that should change the previous zoning ordinance decision. (2) It appears that retailer economics have driven this retailer to not abide by Southlake's current zoning. Is it more appropriate for a retailer needing a satellite dish for customer credit information than it is for other establishments such as freight carriers, TV sales and service, restaurants, etc. (3) Those of us who readily drive by this establishment are tired of seeing this satellite dish eyesore and find it unbecoming of the City. In summary, I believe the adoption of these proposed zoning modifications will undermine much what the City has already accomplished. I believe the proposed ordinance modifications are unwarranted and should not be adopted. Should you have any questions or need additional information, please give me a call at (817) 488-1760. Sincerely, �ex Rex M. Potter cc: Curtis Hawk, City Manager Shana Yelverton, Assistant City Manager Greg Last, Director of Community Development o b- (4 ILL NO. VeC Zd,JD 1J=1L NO.U14 r.U4 ORDINANCE NO.480-T AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO.480, AS AMENDED, THE COMPREHENSIVE TONING ORDINANCE OF THE MY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS, BYALLOWING OUTSME CONTAINER STORAGE FOR RETAIL SALES AS A SPB=C USE PERMIT IN THE "C-3" GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISIItICA BY PERMITIiNG SATELUM DISHES AS PERMIT11M USES IN CERTAIN NON-RESIDENTIAL ZONING DI STRICTS; PROVIDING THAT TBIS ORDINANCE SUALL BE CUMULATIVE OF ALL ORDINANCES; PROVIDING A SEVEtABUM CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY FOR VIOLATIONS HEREOF; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION IN PAMPHLET FORM; PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION IN THE OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE WHEREAS, the City of Souddake, Tezas is a home rule city acting under its charter adopted by the electorate pursuant to Article XI, Section 5 of the Togas Constitution and Chapter 9 of the Local Government Code; and WHEREAS, the City of Southlake has heretofore adopted Ordinance No. 480, as amended, as the zoning ordinance of the city; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Southlake now deems it necessary to amend Ordinance No, 480, as amended, to permit outside container storage -for retail sales as a specific use permit in the "C-3" General Commercial Districtand to permit satellite dishes as permitted uses in certain non-residential zoning districts; and WHEREAS, tho city council has given published notice and held public hearings with respect to the amendments of the zoning ordinance as required by law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH.I.AKEp TEXAS: tukg\wkc\ordJInanc\ (MZ745) IID-15 i-195 :U itL No. uec tu,'J:) 1J-1L HU.U14 r.u:) A SECTION 1. Section 20.2 "Permitted Uses" in the G1 Neighborhood Commercial District is hereby amended by revising permitted use a.5. to read as follows: "S.. Gasoline filling stations that operate in conjunction with small convenience stores. Such use may contain a small car wash facility, but may not include fender or body repairs, mechanical services, rear -end, transmission or engine overhailL One (1) antenna not eacecding thirty-five feet (35) in height, if ground -mounted, and one (1) meter dish size if roof -mounted may be placed on site for the purpose of verifying customer credit information." SECTION 2. Section 21.2'Permitted Uses" in the G2 Iroeal Retail Commercial District is hereby amended by revising permitted use 22. to read as follows: "22. Filling stations or service stations, operating with or without a convenience store. Such use may offer gasoline, oil, greasing and accessories, and may contain a small car wash facility, but may not include fender or body repairs, mechanical services, rear -end, transmission or engine overhaul. One (1) antenna not a weding thirty-five feet (351 in height, if ground -mounted, and one (1) meter dish size if roof -mounted may be placed on site for the purpose of verifying customer credit information." SECTION 3. Section 45.1 of Ordinance No. 480, as amended, is hereby amended by adding the following specific use thereto: y A Outdoor storage for retail purposes, G3 subject to compliance with the following provisions: (toe lAfii1ft\91ake\wdinsnc\4Wt.0" (12 27-95) 2 ILL IYU 0 a. The storage must be in conjunction with a single- tenant structure that exceeds Uri 000 square feet of floor area, b. The total area of outside storage shall not exceed one percent (1%) of the lot area. c. The outside storage area mustbe located behind the front facade of the building, in the side or rear buildable area, and shallnot encroach into airy requires setback or designated fire 21ane. than six feet (6) nor more than eightfeetfence (8 i hes ight constructed of masonry or wood in combination with a metal frame and an opaque gate shall enclose the storage area. SECTION 4. This ordinance shall be cumulative of all provisions of ordinances of the City of Southlake, Texas, cxcCpt where the provisions of this ordinance are in direct COACt with the provisions of such ordinances, in which event the conflicting provisions of SUCK ordinances are hereby repealed. SECTION S. It is hereby declared to bathe inteiztion of the aty Council that the phrasescla , uses, sentences, paragraphs and sections of this -ordinance are severable, and if any phrase, Clause, sentence, paragraph or section of thh o �I shall be declared unconstitutional by the valid judgnent or decree of any court of competent 'urisdicti J on, 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 Co uncil without the [.V1W4+1acc%0M'"ft14W4.002 (12-27-95) 3 I ID-11 ItL NO. VVL /-a.hJ 1J•1L I`IU.V14 r .V( not affect any of the remaining phrases, clauses, sentences, paragraphs and sections of this ordinance, since the same would have been enacted by the aty Council without the incorporation in this ordinance of any such unconstitutional phrase, clause, sentence, Paragraph or section. SEC'IYON 6. Any perm, firm or corporation who violates, disobeys, omits, neglects or ref uses to comply with or who resists the enforcement of any of the provisions of this ordinance shall be fined not snore than Two Thousand Dollars ($2,000.00) for each offense. Each day that a violation is permitted to exist shag 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 ordinance No. 480, as amended, or any other ordinances affecting zoning wluclt have accrued at the time of the effective date of this ordinance; and, as to suchr 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. SFZIION & 71e City Secretary of the City of Southlake is hereby authorized to publish this ordinance in book or pamphlet form for general distribution among the publics 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. t:\filcs\sLAkc\ocdkUUI'\490,C oOZ M-27-M) a I I D- i 8 66R A SEC170N 9. The Ciry Secretary of the City of Southlakc is hereby directed ordinance or its to publish the proposed caption and penalty together with a notice setting out the time and for a public hearing thereon at least ten 10 place � )days before the second reading of this ordinance, aad if this ordinance provides for tile imposition of any penal for any violation of any of its �'� fine or forfeiture provisions, then the City Secretaty shall additionally publish this ordinance or its caption and penalty in the offici al sty newspaper one time k'ithin ten days after passage of this ordinance, as requ;red Of Southlake, by motion 3.13 of the Garter of the City SKMON 10. 7"is °rdinance -Shan be in full force and effect publication as requiredfrom and after its passage and by law, and it is so Ordained - PASSED ,ENO APPROVm ON MST RVADINO ON nuS `, DAY Ok MAYOR �.1 ATTEST. Cam' SFCRRTARtY S IID- 11 . TEL No . Dec 28 , 95 15:06 ado . 013 P .09 PASSED A" APPROVED ON SECOND READING ON THIS DAY OF Y9s� MAYOR ATTEST: CLTY SECRETARY EFFECTIVE: APPROVED AS TO FORM ANU IXGALITY: City Attorney C., r:\r4itx\.tak,e\o,d1nanc\480-c.00z (12-27.g5) ii A-zo