Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.
This document contains no pages.
1996-10-15 CC Packet41
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
