The URL can be used to link to this page

1999-09-07 CC PacketsCity of Southlake, Texas MEMORANDUM August 27, 1999 TO: Billy Campbell, City Manager FROM: Kim Bush, Secretary to the City Manager SUBJECT: Resolution No. 99-68, Appointments to the Crime Control and Prevention District Board. Action Requested: City Council appointment of four members to Crime Control and Prevention District Board. Background Information: The Crime Control District is governed by a board of seven directors who ` are appointed by the City Council and serve staggered two—year terms that expire September 1. On December 2, 1997, City Council appointed 7 directors to the Board — three whose terms expired on September 1, 1998 and four whose terms expired on September 1, 1999. On August 18, 1998, City Council re -appointed Directors Pam McCain, Andy Wambsganss, and Bob Mundlin to two-year terms. The four directors whose terms will expire this year include Kim Clancy, Jerry Farrier, Martin Schelling, and John Swift. All directors have indicated that they are interested in serving another term. The City Secretary's Office has also received applications from Peter Gaal, Frank Pittman, and Danny Mayor indicating their interest in serving on this board. Financial Considerations: n/a Citizen Input/ Board Review: n/a Legal Review: none Alternatives: Appointments must be made in order for the Board to have a quorum, however, the Crime Control Board will not meet again until September 22, 1999 which, if needed, would give City Council until their next meeting on September 16 to make the appointments. - - Supporting Documents: Resolution No. 99-68 Applications for appointments Billy Campbell, City Manager September 2, 1999 Page 2 (W Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends consideration of this item at this time in order' to provide orientation to new members if necessary Approved for Submittal to City Council: City Manager's Office Csa o - City of Southlake, Texas RESOLUTION 99-68 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS, APPOINTING PERSONS TO SERVE ON THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS FOR THE SOUTHLAKE CRIlVIE CONTROL AND PREVENTION DISTRICT AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, Texas Local Government Code, Chapter 363.051 (The "Act") authorizes a municipality that is partially or wholly located in a county with a population of more than one million to create a crime control district within its jurisdiction; and WHEREAS, a special election was held on November 4, 1997 to determine whether the voters of the City of Southlake favored the creation of the Southlake Crime Control and Prevention District dedicated to crime reduction programs and the adoption of a proposed local sales and use tax at a rate of on -half of one percent; and WHEREAS, Southlake voters approved the proposition to create the district; and WHEREAS, Section 363.101(a)(b) of the Local Government Code states that the district is governed by a board of seven directors who serve staggered two-year terms that expire September 1; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS: SECTION 1. That the two-year term for four directors have expired and the following persons are hereby appointed to serve as Directors for the Southlake Crime Control and Prevention District for a two-year term to expire September 1, 2001: 1. 2. 3. 4. SECTION 2. This resolution shall be effective immediately upon passage by City Council. PASSED AND APPROVED THIS THE DAY OF . 1999. -3 City of Southlake, Texas Resolution No. 99-68 i Page 2 CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS MAYOR RICK STACY ATTEST: SANDRA L. LeGRAND CITY SECRETARY APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY ATTORNEY City of Southlake �v- PPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT TO: C�/��n� �2�r� dc ��7` (name of board, commission or committee) * Use a separate application for each appointment desired Name: /-�im S. 0 Vc Address: Home Phone: Q/ 7 - ��-rj3a� Years in City: A� Employer: �prYKCh1C;,�'�� Phone:_ - Current and/or previous board, commission, or committee experience in the City of Southlake: Reasons for desiring to serve on this board, commission, or committee, and your opinion as to the purpose, goals, and duties of same`: ��'�'�w', /e uc` S4 c S G , h yz, C� G r, o �O cc C� C.�s <!JtpcJ�ppo��— alifications and experience that wou asstst you in serving in this posi'ii<bn: 3 �DQ � 0 � //'cam s-7�ef _ c�r2c. [Ca �� lDiL �S-Sd ✓' � � Do you understanagree that your regular attendance and active support are required as an appointee and that noncompliance could result in removal from the board? -\dditional information or comments: Please return this completed form to the City Secretary's Office, 1725 E. Southlake Boulevard or fax to (817) (W1 9-5810. Each application will be kept on file for one ( I ) year. After that time it will be necessary to reapply and update the information herein if you wish to continue to be considered for appointment. Signature: Date: 9 9 D:\WP-FILES\CITYSE FOILMS\APOINTMN.FR.NI AUC-23-99 moN 13:16 FARRIER 817 48 City of SoutWakc APPLICATION FOR AP APPLICATION FOR APPOINTNMNT TO: (namMn • • • C '-� 6'il T7n � oard, commission�or committee) "Use a separate application for each appointment desired Name: Address: Home Phone: - Years in City: �( Employer- tP:A C Phone: Current and/or previous board, commission, or committee experience in the City of Southlake: .2 M Reasons for desiring to serve on this board, commission, or committee, and your opinion as to the Purpose, goals, and duties of same: - to F— W L A- 1 L J Qualifications and experience that would assist you in serving in this position: Do you understand and agree that your regular attendance and active support are required as an appoint and that noncompliance could result in removal from the board? ee Additional information or comments: ?'.ease return this completed form to the City Secret 29-5810. Each application will be kept on file for o z,s 3 7ce, 1725 E. Southlake Boulevard or fax to (817) and update the info ation herein if (l) year. After that time it will be necessary to reapply U wish to continue to be considered for appointment. Signature: Date: 7,7,3� O:IWRFILEs1C1TYSEC\F0KMSApoNj-x N fRM U`NS L.C6A Kl . 9150 P . a City of Southlake APPLICATION FOR APPO. APPLICATION FOR APPOLti 1 �T TO. ��-..i'-1 m g G 0'-fe e s s± &j (name of board, commission or committee) ' U-10 a sepaTare application for each appe &M-enr desired Name: Address: 213 -ro.1-BEe LAwe 0AJ So4-rr4 cA Home Phone: #,214- 114:0 Years in City: Empioyer: L1$21 105 - OY9S r' re .alO� previO"' }`C'.* , CC:r.*r+i3510� t+r C:1m..-riteee exrp'- i- a in !,f;�' �IIY Of $OLIL�113 E: `. l n- • d ♦ V ♦ V.i V /lO.fG LC�b11)nS,1VI��L JJ iLity .iitS2%r c.,v 4 a ;ice a$i"1♦s r. timm i'T"� -A-.A.-tv.z.T `nisi rrt 3 f l-!tits, r rt�- nar, or.3ls, Wild cdU eS c S3 y' I 0 4S l4 TV _,SEI:yE M C17V AAM -rAa% M4 IACV__CrIto w Jh AAM A)F1GN90tLHMb ex„PEIfNGE glee. AUow ICE 7o 5f&t cr -rNf^ 4aonre< r a!-fi _a'i?^s, annd expe;ierce that would assist you in serving in this msltion., ef6t1G 'r 7tm3EX. LAKE C. IMfAOf 80AR> Of Do you u.^._der7cand and agree that your regular attendance and active support are required as an appointee and that noncompliance could result in removal from the board, Additional information or comments: completed rorr:.-+ use �"ity Secretary's 0 ice. 1725 E. So�athlake Boulevard Each application will be kept on fife fvi one i j year. u e W— W e it will b? neceSS Ct`• L�3r�1V and update the :.^.fo1?Yl3tion IIeICIn II you WI,Vro condaue Lo GC considered for apPO' �u♦�c-, J Signature: DuSte: l ^� 19q c\WP-PILES\Cr YSELUFoRNSNPODrF,PWYLu �"�' 7 08/09/1999 16:46 8173594100 GPUBBS INFINITI PAGE 81/81 � 0 City Of SOutWake 9I9A9 APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT OFFICE OF CITY SECRETARy FOR APPOIN 7MENT TO: C�"/'01_rFaf,;t_. D 15�P.�Ci • (name of board, cortzrnission or comrnittee) • Use a separate application for each appointment desired Name: Address: I orne Phone Years in City: Employer. f ��✓� 7'! Phone: - yCurrent and/or previous board, commission, or committee experience in the City of Southlake: 'aE Reasons for desiring to serve on this board, commission, or committee, and your opinion as to the pt,rpose, goal,, and duties of same: A �.�,.� h„A A SO Jn L Li�� 2 fir✓ � sr3Fiti-{5 S /h�lft+zG+�,,,,� . � �uJF� ��7�✓1� tn�s u.IhZ�f %�,e 1 ✓i 51yCf UF' r/ i" - � �/�FC-�2 ��CJ/�Gi7r.� Qua% ications and experience that would assist you in serving in this position: f,, L✓f OLIO C'Qw/PIle i� G�ae.� rm.'4- o.1 F A. y -'"N- I Do You understand and agrcc that your regular attendance and active support are requred as en appointee and ;hat noncompliance could result in removal from the board? yi� Additional information or comments: Please return this completcd form to the City Secretary s Office, 1725 F,. Southiake Boulevard or fax to ($17) 29-58 ! C. Each application will be kept on file for one ) and update the information herein it you wish to continue ro be onSRde cd for appoiner that t1mc R tltment l be necessary to reapply � 16' nature . llatc: ��:�wN-��c.t:src� rYst:c�FotitisU�rolrTr�n� rn� `J TO"d i-LVLT 6Z£ NUM d90=£0 66-60-6nv AW 30 ' 99 16 : 13 FP F P t TTT"Fi i - LAW DEPT 972 -1^8 5065 TO 8-81 Aug-1U-Sly 1LSU4Y City of Southlake APPLICATION FOR AP' APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT TO: 04 �.c�ya.,�,,;, ,G?a,, & (name of board, commission or committee) 'Use a separate apPlication for each aPPointnurrt desired ^QQrCW: / Y-U O ENT QZCV4 Home Phone:_ Zl(. 3 1Years in City: �f Employer: ft�el�d��ee/ 6,1 Phone: 99.2 Current and/or previous board, commission, or committee experience in the City of Southlake: lvwF Reasons for desiring to serve on this board, commission, or committee, and your opinion as to the Purpose. goals, and duties of same: i/'sc,,a�•; ' Air- o0 duo rvS&-,tl /l, a use A/><lvv�,r �E yr of 'Ice, "R{' Lti//�C � Q�G�r ��X�' �O L_/� Q�L/,/rs � �l�Ge�1�•e!! Qu11 tic:,rions and experience that would assist you in Serving in this position: -Y% 4 6.! •- ��S r. i rt Do you understand and agree that your regular attendance and active support are required as an appoint« and that noncompliance could result in removal from the board? _ E .0%ddiuona! information or comments: " Please return this completed form to the City Secretary's office, 1725 F. South —lake Boulevard or fax to (817) 329-5810. gash application will b kept o ile for one M year. After that time it will be necessary to rrapply and update the infor at n herein i u s to continue to be considered for appointment. Si;-tat«re: '-� s Date. 6 3c.3 9 D.IWA•FtLS$IC.'} SC 'oRM OR41-%iN mM AW 10 '99 13:21 ...S,Q- 9 PAGE.e2 �* TOTAL PAGE.02 ** A8 of Southlake 'OR AP: APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT TO: r (name of board, commission or committee) Name: Address: * Use a separate application for each appointment desired lN- �K Home Phone: Years in City: Employer: Phone: Current and/or previous board, commission, or committee experience in the City of Southlake: Reasons for desiring to serve on this board, commission, or committee, and your opinion as to the n. purpose, goals, and duties of same: k,luatuications and experience that would assist you in serving in this position: Do �-ou understand and agree that your regular attendance and active support are required as an appointee and that noncompliance could result in removal from the board? Additional information or comments: Please return this completed form to the City Secretary's Office, 1725 E. Southlake Boulevard or fax to (817) 29 810. Each application will be kept on file for o 1ne (1) year. After that time it will be necessaryto reapply and update the information Aerein if u i to continue to be considered for appointment. Signature ID/j-/0 Date. D:\WP-FIEES\CITYSEC\FOR.MSWOINTMN.FR.M wit' 25 U — City of Southl a APPLICATION FOR APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT TO: C•P!/ue �O�-t7��o� (name of board, commission or committee) *Use a se Name: 1kq x 11A1 <.1/, Address: 4::::- '44�G for each appointment desired led Home Phone: _/, %— years in City: Ernplcyer:lU�lay� Current and/or previous fly Mal e �,ti �i %aa•� A. A.Liviae: board. commission. or cornmMee experience in the City of Southlake: 1va e Reasons for desirin a t0 ;e,^•,e on this board, commission. or committee. and your opinion as to the rpose, �cals, and duties of same: 2 eS'%t,a-o ems' r Qualifications and experience that would assist you in serving. in this position: ��4�1 A�o�l�v o � 6 ` /�� e i T �a �Har , /cs^z r�ica�T, ems, el G � GWX of a'� s, 7 S�QGi�'� . C9-d6cQ GG�c4�P�cf��` v� Ci� .CoC�4il¢S �oQ i Do you understand and agree that your regular attendance and active support are required as an appointee and t,:at noncompliance could result in removal from the board. �97S Additional information or comments: Please return this completed form to the Citv Secretary's Office, 1725 E. Soutlilake Boulevard or fax to (817) 4192. Each application will be kept on file for one (1) year. After that time it will be necessary to reapply ir1 date the inf, a he ein i wi to continue to be considered for appointment. Signature: Date: I7- /� �—�_ /)WP-F1LES\CrrYSEC%FOKMSW0 < M.FR.M PRO-STEI, , INC. Fax:811148U751 Aug 31 '99 10:08 P.OI LANDSCAPE Q INDUSTRY PRODUCTS 5121 Kaftenbrun, Fort Worth, TX 76119 - Metro 817 / 572-4959.1 / 800 / 542-4518 - FAX 817/ 4834751 August 31, 1999 Sandy LeGrand City Secretary City of Southlake Fax 329-5810 C�FEpV AUG 31 1499 �f 3v Confirming our conversation, I would be interested in serving another term on the Crime Control Board for the City of Southlake. Best regard City of Southlake, Texas MEMORANDUM September 2, 1999 TO: Billy Campbell, City Manager FROM: James Kunke, Public Information Officer (Ext. 819) SUBJECT: All -America City Award Action Requested: Adopt a resolution supporting efforts to form a citizens committee and apply for the All -America City Award. Background Information: The National Civic League has awarded the All -America City Award each year since 1950, recognizing "exemplary grassroots community problem solving and ... communities that cooperatively tackle challenges and achieve results." Ciiies are judged on such criteria as citizen participation, community leadership, government performance, volunteerism and philanthropy, intergroup and intragroup relations, civic education, community information sharing, capacity for cooperation and consensus building, community vision and pride, and regional cooperation. In addition, three recent community -driven projects are evaluated for significant impact on the community, including one focused on youth. Financial Considerations: Citizen Input/ Board Review: Legal Review: Alternatives: Southlake has applied for the All -America City Award twice before, in 1995 and 1997. Copies of those applications, and the resultant evaluations. are attached. Applications will be available to cities in October. Finalists will be named in April, and 10 winners will be announced at a ceremony in June. The 1999 application fee for a city Southlake's size was $375 (this year's fees have not been announced). It is possible that the citizens committee could secure outside sources to pay that fee. Municipal Judge Brad Bradley has offered to organize the citizens committee and will be at the meeting to offer his input to City Council. None Do not endorse the application process. 5C-1 Supporting Documents: Staff Recommendation: z Copies of the city's previous applications and evaluations. Approve the resolution and support a citizens committee with City Council and city staff participation. Approved for Submittal to City Council: City Manager's Office 5C-2 r City of Southlake, Texas RESOLUTION NO.99-63 A RESOLUTION BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH - LAKE ENDORSING THE FORMATION OF A CITIZEN COMMITTEE TO APPLY FOR THE NATIONAL CIVIC LEAGUE'S ALL-AMERICA CITY AWARD. WHEREAS, each year since 1950 the National Civic League has awarded the All - America City Award to select communities nationwide, recognizing "exemplary grassroots community problem solving and ... communities that cooperatively tackle challenges and achieve results;" and, WHEREAS, award recipients are determined based on such criteria as citizen participa- tion, community leadership, government performance, volunteerism and philanthropy, inter- group and intragroup relations, civic education, community information sharing, capacity for cooperation and consensus building, community vision and pride, and regional cooperation; and, WHEREAS, residents of Southlake recognize that their community has been successful in each of these areas; and, WHEREAS, the application process for the All -America City Award requires input from all facets of the community, including city government, schools, community groups and business representatives; and, WHEREAS, members of the community have expressed an interest in pursing that application process in an effort to increase civic spirit and highlight successes within the com- munity, demonstrating to residents and to observers throughout the region and the nation that Southlake is "The Best of All Worlds;" NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS: That the City Council does endorse efforts to create a citizen committee for the purpose of applying for the National Civic League's All -America City Award, and does support those efforts. 5C-3 0-- s 0 Resolution No. 99-63 Page 2 PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE ON THIS DAY OF , 1999. ATTEST: City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney Date: 5C-4 Mayor Rick Stacy Southlake (Community) 1995 OFFICIAL ENTRY (City, if different) Tarrant (County) Texas (State) List the individuals who actively participated in filling out the All -America City Award application. NAME/TITLE Gary Fickes, Mayor Rex Potter, Chair Brad Bradley, Municipal Ju ge/Citizen ORGANIZATION City of Southlake SPIN Standing Committee City of Southlake/SYAC/JUC All -America City Award Contact (Major contact person available throughout competition and for follow-up) NAME Kevin Hugman TITLE Assistant to City Manager ORGANIZATION City of Southlake ADDRESS 667 N. Carroll Ave. CITY/STATE/ZIP_Southlake, Texas 76092 TELEPHONE 817 481-55 1 ext. 710 SIGNATURE FAX DAI 01 COMMUNITY STATISTICS FORM RNMENT (if applicable) (circle one) Council- Managers Mavor-Council Commission MEDIAN FAMILY INCOME $63 ,181 source: 1990 Census POPULATION PERCENTAGE of FAMILIES (1990 or most recent) 1994 - 10,400 BELOW POVERTY LEVEL 1 • 5% e• 1990 Census source: North C ef ntral Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG POPULATION PERCENTAGE CHANGE (+ or -), T UNEMPLOYMENT RATE 3 ' O Isource• 1990 Census (1980-1990) 9.67 A. A. G. R. +152/ i n ota source: 1990 Census POPULATION DENSITY (1990 or most recent) POPULATION BREAKDOWN by AGE GROUP (percentages) (if available) 1994 - 484 persons/sq . mi . below 18 years 29.8 % source: NCTCOG (10, 400/21.5 sq . miles PERCENTAGE MINORITY 3. 7% source: 1990 Census RACIAL/ETHNIC POPULATION BREAKDOWN (percentage) 96.3 White (non -Hispanic) /0 Black 0.9 Hispanic (of any origin) 3 °o Asian 0 % Native American 0 °o Other 1.4 % source: 1990 Census 18-24 7 • % 25-44 34.3 Rio 45-64 23.4 % Over 65 5.1 % source: 1990 Census WORKFORCE DISTRIBUTION by INDUSTRY (percentage of total employed in each) Manufacturing 14.1 Trade (retail/wholesale) 21.0 % Agriculture 1.8 % Services 27 g % source: Other 35.2 U.S. Census 5C-5 1995 All -America City Award Application • Page 2 WOMMUNITY BACKGROUND: Set the background for your community situation, not the three specific projects described in subsequent application questions, but the community environment which contributed to and/or resulted from these undertakings. A) The most basic challenges and concerns of the community; B) extent and nature of citizen participation in community improvement efforts; C) degree of success in realizing community goals; ancW success in in I din diver e opglatio s m 11 hases of community improvement. The area around �Soul�ilake i,, tie site o the t�irs�t permanent settlement in Tarrant County. The first pioneers arrived in 1845 and started the Lonesome Dove settlement, including the Lonesome Dove Baptist Church. Today, more than 140 years later, the church still meets on its original site in present-day Southlake. Throughout its first 100 years, the area was sparsely settled by farming families. In the 1950's, spurred by the completion of nearby Lake Grapevine, Southlake began experiencing moderate growth. During the 1970's and early 1980's, growth was slow due to lack of quality water and wastewater systems. The completion of the City's first municipal wastewater lines in 1990, combined with expansion of highways and roads connecting the Dallas -Fort Worth metroplex, enhanced the area's attractiveness for development. Today, the area around the little settlement of Lonesome Dove has emerged as the City of Southlake, one of the fastest growing cities in the Dallas/Fort Worth metroplex and Texas. Since 1987, when the town became a Home Rule Charter city, the population has more than doubled, from approximately 5,400 to more than 12,000 residents, and continues to grow with an annualized growth rate approaching 10%. Yet, even with the tremendous increases in population, almost 60 % of the City's 23 square miles remain undeveloped. Managing this explosive growth has created the greatest challenge. City leaders must continuously balance a multitude of priorities -- meeting infrastructure needs and demands while also meeting quality of life needs in terms of recreation, schools, and business. They must manage the growth of the City in terms of quality and excellence in residential and commercial development, while also striving to preserve the rural, hometown atmosphere that has long been part of the Southlake heritage. Residents, old-timers as well is newcomers, have felt threatened by the rapid growth and have seen neighboring communities that faced ~these challenges with less success. As such, there is continual pressure to plan for Southlake's future. It is this proactive approach by citizens and their leaders that has averted many of the problems and crises that have faced neighboring communities. Planning for growth, City leaders have developed a comprehensive master plan which includes land use, thoroughfare construction, park development, water/wastewater plans, and landscaping and tree preservation. This same proactive approach has been used to improve the quality of life of Southlake's citizens and youth. Realizing that it was only a matter of time before gang -related problems encroached on Southlake's city limits, city and school leaders formed several youth oriented programs such as Students Promoting Alternative Resolutions to Conflict (SPARC), Southlake Youth Advisory Commission (SYAC), and others. Wanting to ensure that all citizens have a voice in their government, City leaders created the Southlake Program for the Involvement of Neighborhoods (SPIN). SPIN helps to enhance and encourage two-way communication, while also providing a voice for the various neighborhoods to express their diverse needs and desires. Each has an equal voice and access to City Council and staff, and SPIN has been instrumental in encouraging broad citizen participation in public hearings, master plan studies, and the budgetary process. Although SPIN has helped foster a new era of citizen involvement, residents have always taken an interest in bettering their community. Volunteers on the Environmental Task Force led Southlake into city- wide recycling in 1991, and the creation of Keep Southlake Beautiful, which received official Keep America Beautiful certification in 1994. Other citizens organized Southlake Citizens for Better Roads in 1991 that not only identified and prioritized much needed street improvements, but also was instrumental in the passage of the road bond election the next year. In 1993, citizens, recognizing the need for recreational facilities, organized Citizens Advocating Parks in Southlake (CAPS). They developed and led a campaign to adopt a 1/2 cent sales tax for park development which residents approved overwhelmingly by more than 2-1. W The participation and involvement of the residents of Southlake has contributed immensely to the success and betterment of the community. The degree of this success is demonstrated by the award winning schools, quality growth of the community, and the innovative programs developed by community leaders. KEEP RESPONSES WITHIN LINES 5C-6 1995 All -America City Award Application • page 3 1. On the next two pages, assess how well your community is doing, based on each of NCL's ten Civic Index components (Review carefully the Civic Index included with application). Support your claims with examples. Please be candid and include not only positive assessments, but negatives ones, indicating what is being done to overcome weaknesses. A. Citizen Participation Citizen participation is an area where Southlake excels -- a long tradition of citizen involvement based on a desire to preserve the past and plan for the future. Citizen groups such as the Southlake Program for the Involvement of Neighborhoods (SPITS), Sister Cities, Friends of the Southlake Library, over 21 active Homeowner's Associations, the Southlake Coalition, and others, have an energetic membership actively working for a better community. Four members of groups such as these have filed this year as candidates for three City Council positions. Public hearings on trails, a highway corridor study, and proposed charter amendments, are routinely well attended and in some cases, have caused them to be rescheduled at school facilities to accommodate the larger than anticipated attendance. Voter registration and participation in elections has steadily increased through recent years. B. Community Leadership Southlake experiences strong leadership from a myriad of participants. Public, private, and non-profit entities routinely interact on community planning issues. The City Council and school board hold joint meetings to discuss future joint land acquisitions; Park Board and Keep Southlake Beautiful (KSB) often cooperate in park planning activities; City and Chamber share economic development responsibilities. Leadership is developed through programs such as SPIN, Southlake Youth Advisory Commission (SYAC) , KSB, and Leadership Southlake. Jointly sponsored by the City and Chamber, Leadership Southlake has graduated 38 people from five classes, at least half of whom are now active on council, boards, commissions, and civic organizations within Southlake. C. Government Performance 'Southlake citizens tend to be well-educated, professional people, who expect above -average performance, openness and accountability from their government. Southlake's excellent financial management resulted in two bond upgrades in the past two years and budget presentation awards from the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA). Senior management and professional staff include many with advanced degrees and professional registration. Public hearing opportunities beyond those required by law allow citizen input on economic corridor studies, trail and park master planning studies, and road reconstruction recommendations. The Council has proactively taken the initiative to develop a Code of Ethics and Conduct applicable to Council members, boards, commissions, committees, and staff. D. Volunteerism and Philanthropy The largest volunteer activity ever undertaken by the citizens of Southlake is currently underway. Over 16,000 volunteer hours will be needed to build a playground costing more than $150,000 in less than seven days. Citizens and businesses have contributed building materials, money, labor, and enthusiasm for this project; three businesses have donated $10,000 each. Citizens strongly support numerous community and non-profit groups, including KSB, Sister Cities, Friends of the Library, etc. KSB's Adopt -A -Street program has over 100 volunteers keeping 16 miles of city streets litter -free. The City just implemented Southlake Association of Volunteers (SAV), a clearinghouse to match volunteer citizens with City project needs, ultimately saving taxpayers' money. E. Intergroup Relations Although Southlake is not yet enriched by racial or ethnic diversity, differences exist in terms of population age, length of residency, and economic status. In addition, many new residents have come from other areas of the nation and the globe with differing political structures, resulting in a kind of "geographic -based" cultural diversity. SPIN seeks to involve all of these groups -- youth, retirees, young families, newcomers, long-time residents, minorities, native and non-native Texans. Enlightening citizens about neighboring communities is accomplished through programs such as the Tarrant County Youth 'Collaboration. Education about the world community is through an active Sister Cities program which has sponsored several exchange delegations and a video teleconference between Southlake and Japanese schools. KEEP RESPONSES WITHIN LINES 5C-7 1995 All -America City Award Application • Page 4 Civic Education Southlake citizens are interested in civic education, whether offered through schools, the Chamber, other organizations, or the City. The Southlake Youth Advisory Commission (SYAC), composed of students in grades 7-12, has been established to advise the Mayor on youth issues and to initiate civic projects. This complements programs offered by the school district, such as student council, which gives credit hours for community service. City leaders offer mentorship through participation in Junior Achievement. Through SPIN, adults and youth work with elected officials or staff in their own neighborhoods and are regularly provided with information on important issues. SPIN leaders, interested in increasing participation in local elections, have initiated a voter registration drive this spring. The Chamber and City offer the Leadership Southlake program discussed previously. G. Community Information Sharing Southlake is a small, but rapidly growing city in the heart of the DFW Metroplex. As such, it is difficult to attract the attention of the major media. Still, the City is committed to creating a civic environment in which citizens are well informed. Disseminating a monthly newsletter to all residents, printing brief notices in the utility bills, working with local newspapers, and distributing informational flyers on items of interest are common practices. Through SPIN, staff and elected officials go to neighborhood meetings to discuss issues and answer questions. Many SPIN leaders produce their own "neighborhood" newsletters and have developed phone trees to get .information to citizens. Finally, an expanded "Directory of City and Community Services" provides citizens with the phone numbers needed to get questions answered. a acit for Coq eratio and Cons ns s Builclin o vmg community problems m Sout�ilake mOolves a rich weave of participants. The City enjoys an excellent relationship with the school district, Chamber of Commerce, businesses and community groups. Through the Joint Utilization Committee, the city and school district enjoy frequent interaction for solving problems such as demand for park facilities. The Southlake Dispute Resolution Center was recently formed using City, school and business leaders as volunteer mediators to assist disputing parties resolve differences. Likewise, a City/school project named SPARC, creates a forum for "peer mediation" in the schools, utilizing youth mediators. The business community is active in Southlake, with business leaders most recently playing an active role in developing the 1994-95 Corridor Study which will define development regulations along the City's major thoroughfares. I. Community Vision and Pride Citizens of Southlake are proud to live in this community, evidenced by the rapid growth of Southlake over the last few years. The City continues to be a "melting pot" of citizens from diverse backgrounds, relocating predominantly from outside the region. This growth and influx of newcomers has in turn challenged the community to portray its pride in some unique, communal way since there is no downtown area nor community -wide festival. Yet, long-time residents and newcomers share a sense of vision of what they want their community to look like and to be. Numerous citizens are participating in the 1994-95 Corridor Study, the Economic Development Strategic Plan, and Southlake 2010, three instruments providing strategic direction for the City. Southlake also possesses an academically strong school system, several schools within Southlake having won prestigious Blue Ribbon honors from the U.S. Department of Education. J. Regional Cooperation Numerous regional entities plan and promote the region. Southlake was instrumental in developing and sustaining the Northeast Leadership Forum and Metroport as active economic development organizations composed of public, private and non-profit allies. With the rapid growth of the region, infrastructure projects are jointly developed by city, county, regional and state organizations. Public safety, youth programs, environmental concerns, and quality of life factors are routinely addressed through cooperation. Examples include: the Regional Trails Master Plan, the Colleyville/Grapevine/Southlake Teen Court, w and lobbying for earlier construction of State Highway 114 (city and private sector). Regionally, the private and pu',,lic sector have joined forces to solve the ozone crisis (North Texas Air Quality Coalition). KEEP RESPONSES WITHIN LINES SC-8 1995 All -America City Award Application • Page 5 '.. NCL believes a strong civic infrastructure provides the skills and processes for a community to effectively address important local issues. Using the ten components of NCL's Civic Index as a guide, discuss how your community's civic infrastructure helped the community address its key challenges. Give examples of how your community has encouraged: • collaboration between community sectors; • broad -based citizen involvement; • shared decision making among diverse segments of the population. Many projects currently underway would not be possible had it not been for the collaboration between various community sectors. The City of Southlake, with the Chamber of Commerce, helps sponsor Leadership Southlake, a year -long training class for future community leaders. Since the first class graduated in 1990, many have gone on to elected school and municipal offices, appointed boards and commissions, and community and civic leadership positions. The 1993 Leadership Southlake class proposed the idea of a community playground as its advocacy project. The result, a $150,000 playground named Adventure Alley, will be entirely constructed by volunteers from the community and business sector, using tools donated by local businesses and individuals. The non-profit organization formed to raise money for the project is composed of volunteers from the private and public sector, who have already contributed thousands of hours in the past two years towards planning and fund-raising activities. An active Sister Cities program, co -sponsored by the City, has hosted several cultural exchange visits with our Japanese sister city, Toyoma. CultureLink Educational Foundation, a non-profit group founded to broaden cultural awareness, achieved a major accomplishment last year by coordinating a video teleconference between high schools in Southlake and Tokyo, Japan. This project would not have been possible without the participation of the school district, a major commercial airline, and a major telephone equipment manufacturer who contributed over $20,000 in technical services and equipment use. Planning for growth has been an issue of prime importance for many years. Community leaders and zity staff depend on Southlake's civic infrastructure to attain the necessary broad -based involvement from both residential and commercial arenas. Southlake Citizens for Better Roads (SCBR) was formed by residents to identify and prioritize needed road improvements, and was instrumental in passage of the bond election the following year by conducting a public relations campaign featuring a speakers bureau, phone bank, straw poll, and neighborhood door to door canvassing. Citizens Advocating Parks in Southlake (CAPS), was another example of broad based citizen involvement. In 1993, this group researched the feasibility of funding park and recreational facilities through an additional 1/2 cent local sales tax. CAPS developed and led a campaign to convince residents to approve the additional sales tax. Their efforts were rewarded by an overwhelming majority vote at the polls and as a result of this election, Southlake has been able to fund more than $3.5 million in park improvements and land purchases. The greatest effort by City leaders to achieve broad based citizen involvement has been the creation of the Southlake Program for the Involvement of Neighborhoods (SPIN). SPIN was created to provide all citizens equal access to elected officials, facilitate two-way communication between government and citizens, and encourage more participation in decision making that affects the entire community. The program has been hugely successful. In the recently completed citizen satisfaction survey, over 70% of residents believed SPIN was beneficial to their neighborhoods and to the community and 31% said that they actively participate in the SPIN process. SPIN has also helped achieve higher attendance at public hearings for a corridor development study, trail and park master planning studies, and road reconstruction issues. City Council hearings on zoning cases and other development issues have also seen increased participation by citizens. Input from SPIN representatives has also been solicited by Council in this year's budget planning preparations. While SPIN has proven a convenient means to mobilize residents of a neighborhood area on issues -)f concern to them, it has also proven to be beneficial for philanthropic reasons. When a recent traffic accident claimed the life of a young mother from the community, some SPIN representatives quickly organized a weekend fund drive which collected over $10,000 for the far,;ily. KEEP RESPONSES WITHIN LINES 5C-9 PROJECT ONE 1995 All -America City Award Application • Page 6 'A. Briefly describe the first of the three main citizen -driven projects (Project 1) that has significantly impacted the wr community since 1992. Project 1 should illustrate the community ability to anticipate problems by proactively dealing with community challenges The Joint Utilization Committee (JUC) is a City/School District partnership focusing on full use of assets and the most efficient method of providing services to taxpayers. The Committee is composed of five voting members -- one from City Council, two from the School Board, one from the Park Board, and one citizen at -large. City and school staff also support the JUC in ex-officio capacity. In its first few meetings held in 1993, the JUC identified several items as potential joint ventures, including improvements to recreational facilities on school district property. In addition to leveraging improvements to school district facilities in exchange for after-hours use by the residents, the JUC has also looked at other types of City/School joint ventures in response to inputs from neighborhood groups and community organizations. Joint use ideas have not only centered on recreational and physical structures, but also on personnel, policy and program sharing. JUC acts as an "idea" committee, making recommendations for possible joint ventures, and also serves as the first level of review when implementing a joint venture. JUC also reviews joint use agreements, bid proposals, and other administrative issues, prior to making a formal recommendation to the City Council and School Board. 1B. How did the community come to identify the issue addressed in Project 1 as a community priority? Due to rapid development, Southlake is in transition from ranching and farming community to metroplex suburban city. As such, the City faces significant infrastructure issues -- roads must be widened and improved, water and sewer lines constructed, and additional water storage facilities built. School districts must build and staff new facilities to meet the increased student population. As the city grows too, the demand for family recreational facilities and programs also grows. Currently, this city of 23 square miles has only one developed 14.3 acre park with three ballfields, some soccer practice ,,fields, and less than 3,000 square feet of community meeting facilities. The idea of joint use projects between the City and school district seemed like a method of meeting the demand quickly and relatively inexpensively, and since Carroll ISD is the largest school district within the corporate boundaries of Southlake and serves the majority of Southlake residents, the opportunity for partnership was ideal. Use of City funds to leverage school recreational facility improvements and new construction allowed cost savings to the school district, while providing recreational facilities at a fraction of the cost necessary if the City were to build its own. The joint utilization concept has not stopped with recreational facilities. Joint projects such as computer bulletin boards, peer mediation at the youth and adult level, purchasing programs, and other ideas have been developed and are in progress. 1C. What significant impacts has this project had on the community? Include quantifiable results as well as changes in the way the community confronts critical local issues. Since the JUC made its first recommendations to City Council on July 6, 1993, numerous projects have been undertaken by the partnership. The largest of these projects is the current construction of an $800,000 gymnasium/recreation center, funded by City parks development bonds and built on school property. Once the facility is open, over 400 residents per day will make use of it. In 1993-94, the City contributed over $54,000 for improvements to school athletic fields and gymnasiums; in return, over 4,500 residents utilized these facilities. Other joint programs sponsored, funded, and supported by Southlake and Carroll ISD include: a dispute mediation program of 14 trained volunteers from the ISD, City, and private business; a teen peer mediation program which includes advisers from school, City, and businesses; and a police school resource officer and drug education officer to assist school officials, assigned from the Southlake police department and partially paid for by the school district. Sharing of ideas and expertise have also been facilitated by JUC. After a recent failed school bond ,election, City and school officials shared insights from the City's experience with a successful sales tax election for parks development. The next school bond election passed by.,a comfortable margin. KEEP RESPONSES WITHIN LINES 5C-10 PROJECT ale . 1995 All -America City Award Application • Page 7 1D. What attempts were made to involve the citizens directly affected by the projects in program development and to what extent were they successful? How were diverse segments of the population involved in the decision - making l"IfRommendations for most major joint use projects originate with the JUC, whose voting members include representatives from the City Council, school board, parks board, and citizens at - large, ensuring a variety of perspectives and constituencies are represented. Public meetings allow ball associations, Keep Southlake Beautiful, and other community organizations to make presentations before the JUC. Projects that receive funding from the City must also be recommended by the Southlake Parks Development Corporation (SPDC), responsible for oversight of the sales tax revenue for park construction and .development. The SPDC includes City Council and park board members, and citizens at -large. Projects are ultimately authorized by the elected officials of the City Council and Carroll ISD School Board. SPIN members, brainstorming on ideas to enhance communication between government and citizens, suggested a public access cable channel shared by the City and Carroll ISD. Through various elected and appointed bodies, decision -making is shared by many people. Continued communication enhances the ability of the City and the School District to cooperate and in doing so, builds public trust and helps to reduce the need for school or city tax increases. 1E. For Project 1, list the principal groups and organizations involved and the number of members participating in these efforts. Summarize their contribution to the project. Name City Council/ CISD School Board Park Board City / School Staff Number of Members Participating in Project Contribution Fourteen (14) Provide leadership and direction to Joint Utilization Committee; provide new ideas and projects. Nine (9) Provide recommendations to Joint Utilization Committee. Ten (10) Implement and oversee joint use projects; provide administrative support to JUC. 1E For Project 1, identify three individuals who were active leaders. (Include leaders from the public, private and nonprofit sectors.) Name/Title Rick Wilhelm Chair, JUC Bethann Scratchard Park Board/JUC Curtis E. Hawk City Manager Organization / Address 1330 Woodbrook Lane Southlake, TX 76092 1410 Whispering Dell Street Southlake, TX 76092 City of Southlake 667 North Carroll Avenue Southlake, TX 76092 KEEP RESPONSES WITHIN LINES 5C-11 Telephone (817) 481-5073 (817) 481-3558 (817) 481-5581, x702 PROJECT TWO 1995 All -America City Award Application • Page 8 2A. Briefly describe the second main project (Project 2) that has significantly impacted the community since 1992. Project 2 should illustrate the community's ability to respond in collaborative and resourceful ways to a current critical problem. Describe who specifically was involved in program development and how decisions were made. Southlake recognizes youth as its greatest available resource and in an effort to better tap that resource, the City Council created the Southlake Youth Advisory Commission (SYAC), and the youth component of the Southlake Program for the Involvement of Neighborhoods (SPM. Joint projects between the school district and the City, SPIN and SYAC address the needs and concerns of the city's young people. Students Promoting Alternative Resolutions to Conflict (SPARC) is a City and school district sponsored student peer mediation group. Students in grades 3-12 resolve conflicts before they become violent. These programs identify youth issues as a priority and provide public awareness, input, and support to their concerns. Under the direction of the Mayor, SYAC provides a forum for students to communicate their concerns directly to elected officials. The SPIN youth committee, in conjunction with the overall SPIN program created by City Council and supported by City staff, gathers input from youth regarding implementation of community -wide programs. The youth delegate is an equal member alongside the 16 adult neighborhood leaders who together compose the SPIN Standing Committee. Both SYAC and SPIN familiarize youth with the governmental process by creating communication between the youth, elected state - and local leaders, and City staff. 2B. How did the community come to identify the issue addressed in Project 2 as a community priority? To allow our youth to grow in a healthy and desirable environment, Southlake took steps to afford them the opportunities to impact the future. As neighboring communities grew, they saw an increase in problems such as gangs and excessive drug and alcohol addiction. With Southlake's recent rapid growth, both the City and school district are seeir_g a great increase in the number of youth. With many of the youth coming from different regions, they bring new concerns and needs into the community. To avoid the unhealthy undercurrents of other communities, Southlake is taking a proactive stand for youth by giving them an opportunity to take an interest in their future. The City initiated several programs that allow youth to identify issues important to them, formulate solutions and alternatives to these problems, and present their plan to City and school leaders. SPARC acts as a catalyst for students to solve their problems in school and to interact with youth from other communities, broadening their awareness and understanding of youth with various socio-economic backgrounds. Through programs like SYAC, SPIN and SPARC, our young people are given an opportunity to use the available resources and support to address issues and concerns they confront in their day-to-day lives. 2C. What significant impacts has this project had on the community? Include quantifiable results as well as chap es in the way the community confronts critical local issues. Since thieir inception, SYAC, SPIN and SPARC have all generated avenues of discussion among our youth. The 35 active representatives of SYAC and SPIN poll their peers for feedback and recommendations. In addition to serving as leaders among their peers, the youth representatives serve as communicators to City staff and elected officials. SPARC has had a double success. SPARC has been the instrument for approximately 17 successful meditations, which have been so successful that the number of issues needing resolution have decreased. The second noticeable effect is in the school environment. Teachers have remarked that because students have seen successful mediations, they worry less about a conflict erupting, and can therefore have more time to participate in the classroom. At its inception, SYAC identified three major areas of concern; volunteerism, drugs and alcohol, and teen curfew. To address teen curfew, SYAC members researched the pending state legislation, polled their peers, developed a position paper, and then traveled to our state capitol to meet with the local state senator and the governor. Students are also participating in a "Youth in Government" Day that allows interaction between City staff and the thirty-five SYAC participants. Students are currently working with City staff to brainstorm about innovative ways to combat drug problems and are developing strategies and plans for continuing the SYAC program through ' the summer and into the next school year, including the development of a "Junior Park Board" to provide youth input to the park and recreation planning process. KEEP RESPONSES WITHIN LINES 5C-12 PROJECT TWO 1995 All -America City Award Application • Page 9 2D. What attempts were made to involve the citizens directly affected by the projects in program development and to what extent were they successful? How were diverse segments of the population involved in the decision - making process? To ensure broad based participation in our youth programs, the City worked directly with the school district to generate interest. As the programs grew and gained visibility, the number of interested youth and their parents also increased. The two programs, SPIN and SYAC, have been successful in promoting a proactive participation of youth and have allowed the students to pursue different avenues of interest. SYAC is composed of thirty-five members, selected by committee from interested applicants, and represents grades 7-12 with two at -large positions for students living in the city but outside the school district. SYAC has taken a stand on several issues and looks forward to participating in a county -wide program that will allow them to be involved with inner-city youth. The youth component of SPIN serves as a communication liaison between the youth and adult community and City officials. The SPIN representative, selected by the City Council, represents students in grades 4-12. When the committees were established, they purposely did not have a defined agenda so that the students could actively discuss areas of concern and themselves determine what process to take in addressing those concerns. SPARC students, selected by their principals and teachers have been very successful in mediating disputes between their peers on all school campuses. 2E. For Project 2, list the principal groups and organizations involved and the number of members participating in these efforts. Summarize their contribution to the project. Name Southlake Youth Advisory Commission (SYAC) Southlake Program for the Involvement of Neighborhoods (SPM Students Promoting Alternative Conflict Resolutions (SPARC) Number of Members Participating in Project Thirty-five (35) Twelve (12) Fifty (50) Contribution "Voice of youth" -- advisory body to Mayor and City Council. Communication liaison with schools, City elected leaders, and City staff. Youth volunteer dispute mediation services for students. 2E For Project 2, identify three individuals who were active leaders. (Include leaders from the public, private and nonprofit sectors.) Name/Title Organization / Address Gary Fickes City of Southlake Mayor 667 North Carroll Avenue Southlake, TX 76092 Brad Bradley Bradley and Bradley Municipal Judge 3205 E. Highway 114, Suite Southlake, TX 76092 Rachel Samartin 1211 Timber Court Chair (SYAC) Southlake, TX 76092 KEEP RESPONSES WITHIN LINES 5C-13 Telephone (817) 481-5581, x704 (817) 488-8048 (817) 481-1285 PROJECT THREE 1995 All -America City Award Application Page 10 3A. Briefly describe the third main project (Project 3) that has significantly impacted the community since 1992. SPIN is a formal citizen participation program, created by ordinance, to facilitate two-way communication between Southlake neighborhoods and city elected officials and staff. Southlake is divided into sixteen SPIN "neighborhoods," with a captain selected by each and formally appointed by the Council. A youth delegate ensures participation by Southlake's children from fourth through twelfth grade. There are few prescribed rules by which neighborhoods must operate, giving them the flexibility to address issues and concerns unique to their own neighborhood. They are encouraged, however, to hold periodic neighborhood meetings where they can host city staff or elected officials, or simply discuss issues of importance to them. Many of the SPIN areas produce neighborhood newsletters or organize phone trees. Simply put, SPIN gets more citizens involved in the general activities and decision making of the City. The City has made a commitment to keep the SPIN leaders informed and accomplishes this by providing copies of Council agendas, P&Z Commission meeting agendas, news releases, and notification of Any zoning change requests within their neighborhood. Although staff helps initiate projects for the neighborhoods and for SPIN leaders as a group, the leaders and participants have shown a clear preference to be in charge of their own destiny and insist upon retaining much autonomy. As a result of SPIN, the 17 citizens identified as leaders have become very active and informed members of the community, and their neighbors have direct access to City Hall through them. 3B. How did the community come to identify the issue addressed in Project 3 as a community priority? Since 1991, Southlake has been one of the fastest growing cities in the Dallas -Fort Worth metroplex. With an annualized growth rate of nearly 10%, many new residents have come into the City. In addition, with 23 square miles of land area, there is a wide variety of needs and concerns among the many neighborhoods of the community. City leaders saw the need to include all citizens in the decision -making process, giving them expanded opportunities for meaningful and convenient participation. Of equal importance was the desire to tap into the pool of experience and enthusiasm of the many new residents who might not otherwise become quickly involved in the local civic process. Having found the public hearing process to be somewhat ineffective in encouraging citizens to participate, the Council created SPIN to facilitate two-way communication between the City and neighborhoods. Typically, residents would become involved in the process only during a "neighborhood crisis," that is, when a controversial issue prompted them to become involved. They had openly expressed frustration at their seeming inability to influence an issue's outcome. Through SPIN, citizens who had previously felt intimidated by City Hall, now have a quick and direct, nonconfrontational means of access to city officials. SPIN has also served as a vehicle for information transfer, both directions, which has enriched the decision -making process. Through SPIN, members of the community get needed information, ask questions, and otherwise participate in meaningful ways. 3C. What significant impacts has this project had on the community? Include quantifiable results as well as changes in the way the community confronts critical local issues. Although not yet reaching its full potential, SPIN has dramatically increased residents' awareness of city activities and willingness to get involved. A recent Citizen Satisfaction Survey showed over 70% of residents felt SPIN was beneficial; 31 % said they actively participate in SPIN. Some leaders hold monthly neighborhood meetings, but all meet at least quarterly. Typical meetings have 25-35 residents in attendance and sponsor elected officials or city staff to discuss particular topics such as road reconstruction, land use plans and corresponding studies, park development, or the general state of the city. SPIN leaders also disseminate information and are generally recognized as neighborhood liaisons by developers, consultants, business and community leaders. SPIN leaders frequently host City staff on tours of their neighborhood, pointing out needed improvements and neighborhood issues and concerns. Problems are addressed during this process with SPIN requests given the highest priority. The commitment of the City is most evident by its asking SPIN leaders to submit requests for neighborhood improvements and work with the Council to prioritize the specific needs, thereby taking an active role in the budget process. SPIN leaders have initiated ,a number of projects, including a City and Community Services Directory, a citizen satisfaction survey, a brush chipping/composting project, a voter registration drive, and a number of volunteer projects. Three of five individuals running for Council seats in 1995 became involved through the SPIN process. KEEP RESPONSES WITHIN LINES 5CA 4 PRO,WT THM 1995 All -America City Award Application • Page 11 3D. What attempts were made to involve the citizens directly affected by the projects in program development and to what extent were they successful? How were diverse segments of the population involved in the decision- makingprocess? The ordiiance governing SPIN deliberately provides maximum flexibility for implementation in the neighborhoods. An early Town Hall meeting generated citizen ideas which were then incorporated into the SPIN program; development of the program has continued to be an ongoing effort. SPIN leaders recently, for example, authored and approved a "Code of Conduct" for themselves, to ensure that the program is completely open to all citizens, is non -partisan, and upholds the highest ideals of fair and impartial representation. Strategies to overcome the apathy of residents are continually discussed during monthly meetings of SPIN leaders. SPIN leaders and the City Council meet quarterly to discuss issues of mutual interest, and additionally, a SPIN representative has the opportunity to make a neighborhood report at every City Council meeting. Youth participation in the process is also meaningful. As a result of SPIN and other youth programs, the City is considering the development of a "Junior Park Board" to provide a mechanism for young people to have a direct impact on the development of future parks. In short, each neighborhood, as well as youths, have equal access to the decision -making process, staff and elected officials. 3E. For Project 3, list the principal groups and organizations involved and the number of members participating in these efforts. Summarize their contribution to the project. Name Southlake Program for the Involvement of Neighborhoods (SPIN) Number of Members Participating in Project Two thousand (2,000)+ Contribution Neighborhood participation .City Council/ Twenty-five (25) Organizational support, volunteer SPIN representatives hours to ensure communication, participation, enthusiasm. City of Southlake Fifteen (15) Provide administrative and Staff logistical support; implement ideas and desires of Council, SPIN reps. 3E For Project 3, identify three individuals who were active leaders. (Include leaders from the public, private and nonprofit sectors.) Name /Title Rex Potter Chair, SPIN Standing Cmte Brad Bradley Municipal Judge Shana Yelverton Assistant City Manager Organization / Address 303 Waterford Court Southlake, TX 76092 Bradley and Bradley 3205 E. Highway 114, Suite 1 Southlake, TX 76092 City of Southlake 667 North Carroll Avenue Southlake, TX 76092 KEEP RESPONSES WITHIN LINES 5C-15 Telephone Home: (817) 488-1760 Work: (817) 777-1646 (817) 488-8048 (817) 481-5581, x705 OFFICERS John W Gardner, Chairman Robert C. Bobb, Vice Chairman Albert C. Gonzales, Treasurer Joan Hammond, Secretary Christopher T Gates, President DIRECTORS Don Benninghoven John Claypool R. Scott Fosler James 0. Gibson Charles M. Greene Hubert Guest Or John Stuart Hall Dr. LennealJ. Henderson, Jr. Dr. Theodore Hershberg Anna Faith Jones James E. Kunde Lane Levetan Gail Levin Donald McIntyre Heather McLeod tiert H. Muller y Jane Narver hn B. Olsen Neal R. Peirce Mark Pisano Janis Purdy Robert H.Rawson, Jr. Juan Sepulveda Carrie Thornhill Arturo Vargas David Vidal Dr. Henry R. Winkler Linda J. Wong HONORARY LIFE DIRECTORS FORMER CHAIRMEN Terrell Blodgett Henry G. Cisneros James L Hetland, Jr. George Latimer Hon. Cecil Morgan Carl H. Plorzheimer, Jr. Hon. Terry Santord Hon. William W. Scranton Hon. William E Winter Hon. Wilson W. Wyatt. Sr. NATIONAL CIVIC LEAGUE 1445 MARKET STREET SUITE 300 DENVER, CO 80202-1728 (303)571-4343 (303)571-4404 ernet: cgates@ncl.org WWW: httpl/www.csn.net/ncl September 20, 1995 Kevin Hugman Assistant to City Manager City of Southlake 667 North Carroll Avenue Southlake, Texas 76092 Dear Mr. Hugman: The Board and staff of the National Civic League are grateful to the community of Southlake, Texas for participating in the 1995 All - America City Award Program. The enthusiasm and commitment of communities such as yours accounts for the ongoing relevance and popularity of the All -America City Award. The willingness of citizens, organized groups and businesses to join with the governing institutions of your community to identify and solve critical issues is a justifiable source of internal pride and external admiration. The enclosed evaluation summarizes information drawn from Southlake's application and the 1995 Screening Committee's deliberations and written comments. The evaluation is intended to assist your follow-up to the application process with other participants. Feel free to contact either of us if you have questions regarding the enclosed evaluation. Again, we thank you for participating in the 1995 All -America City Award Program, and hope to work with you again next year. Sincerely, )arole Bloom Director, All -America City Award Program (303) 571-4343 5C-16 David Lampe Editor, NATIONALCIvIC REviEw (303) 322-7265 1-1 1995 All -America City Applicant Evaluation SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS The 1995 All -America City Screening Committee congratulates the citizens, businesses and public agencies of Southlake, Texas for their collaborative efforts and substantial progress in community improvement. The projects described in Southlake's 1995 All -America City application constitute affirmative steps to satisfy genuine community needs. Screening Committee members were impressed by the sound planning and execution of Southlake's various collaborative efforts. Based on Southlake's application, it is clear that the community's experiences can serve as a model and source of inspiration for other localities endeavoring to realize 1%W greater benefit from public assets and revenue flows, develop leadership and citizenship among youth, and encourage constructive communication between citizens and city government. Among the elements of Southlake's 1995 All -America City effort that most impressed members of the Screening Committee was the Joint Utilization Committee, which constitutes an effective effort on the part of the public sector to seek citizen satisfaction through innovation, creativity and collaboration. Screening Committee members commented favorably on JUC's extension of its joint -venture philosophy beyond facilities to embrace sharing and cooperation in the areas of personnel, policy and program delivery. The savings, efficiencies and quality enhancements achieved through JUC render this program truly worthy of national recognition. Similarly impressive was the Southlake Program for the Involvement of Neighbors, which has succeeded in generating interest among Southlake residents in their governing institutions, while fostering a warm, cooperative relationship between citizens and the public sector. Particularly noteworthy is the fact that SPIN has apparently inspired a number of Southlake residents to adopt a highly active model of citizenship by running for public office themselves. Active citizenship is too often limited to the 5C-17 model in which citizens antagonize and pressure government, rather than participating in it or working with it. More detail on the nature of specific issues and conflicts addressed through the SPIN citizen participation mechanism might have strengthened Southlake's overall presentation of this effort. - While highly participatory in design, the Southlake Youth Advisory Commission was more difficult to evaluate. A fine boundary was discernible between SYAC and SPIN, raising some question of the extent to which SYAC constitutes another aspect or dimension of SPIN, rather than a separate effort. Additionally, Screening Committee members commented that the discussion of SYAC emphasized program design and process, as opposed to specific achievements. More detail on Southlake's progress in addressing the volunteerism, substance abuse and teen curfew issues through the SYAC process might have reversed this impression. Overall, Southlake is building a strong base for becoming an All -America City in the future, particularly as evidence emerges that the community's many strong participatory processes and structures are generating tangible impacts. A future application might also place greater emphasis on the contributions of community -based organizations to the governance process in Southlake. The community's 1995 application portrayed a very strong public sector presence, to the apparent exclusion of other partners in community building. The National Civic League wishes Southlake continued success in its efforts at community betterment, and we hope you will regard us as a future source of support, guidance and assistance in confronting and solving civic issues. 5C-18 M 1997 OFFICIAL ENTR Y - Part I Southlake Tarrant/Denton TX (Community) (City, if different) (County) (State) List the individuals who actively participated in filling out the All -America City and Community Award application. NAME/TITLE Rick Stacy, Mayor Kaye Joesten, Adventure Alley Co -Chair David Baltimore, SPIN Standing Cmte Chair ORGANIZATION City of Southlake Adventure Alley SPIN All -America City and Community Award Contact: (Major contact person available throughout competition and for follow-up.) NAME Kevin Hugman E-MAIL ADDRESS TITLE Community Services Manager ORGANIZATION City of Southlake ADDRESS 1725 E. Southlake Boulevard CITY',.STATE\ZIP Southlake. TX 76092-6092 TELEPHONE (817) 481-5581 FAX NUMBER SIGNATURE -1-7�fi`� DATE COMMUNITY STATISTICS FORM OF GOVERNMENT, if applicable: Council -Manager POPULATION (1990 or most recent) 14.950 source: N. Cent Tx Cncil of Gov mts (NCTCOG) --1996 POPULATION PERCENTAGE CHANGE (+ or -) (1980-1990) +152 source: 1990 U.S. Census POPULATION DENSITY (1990 or most recent) 695 persons/square mile source: NCTCOG -- 1996 PERCENTAGE MINORITY 3.7 % source: 1990 U.S. Census RACIAL/ETHNIC POPULATION BREAKDOWN (percentage) White (non -Hispanic) 96.3 % Black 0.9 % Hispanic ( of any origin) 3.9 % Asian 0.0 % Native American 0.0 % Other 1.4 % source: 1990 U.S. Census DIAN FAMILY INCOME $63.181 source: 1990 U.S. Census khugman@ci.southlake.tx.us (817) 488-6796 3--Z'v - 7 PERCENTAGE OF FAMILIES BELOW POVERTY LEVEL source: 1990 U.S. Census UNEMPLOYMENT RATE source: Texas Workforce Commission -- 1996 POPULATION BREAKDOWN BY AGE GROUP (percentages) (if available) below 18 years 29.8 % 18-24 7.4 % 25-44 34.3 % 45-64 23.4 % Over 65 5.1 % source: 1990 U.S. Census PERCENTAGE OF HOME OWNERSHIP MEDIAN PRICE: 3 bedroom, 2 bath house MEDIAN RENT: 2 bedroom, 1 bath%month source: 1990 U.S. Census WORKFORCE DISTRIBUTION BY INDUSTRY (percentage of total emploved in each) Manufacturing 14.1 % Trade (retail: wholesale) 21.0 % Agriculture 1.8 % Services 27.9 % source: 1990 U.S. Census 5C-19 1.5 % 1.6 °a 87.0 ° o $168,000 $0 1997 All -America City and Community Award Application - Page 2 COMMUNITY BACKGROUND: Set the background for your community's story. Summarize your general community situation (not the 3 specific projects described in subsequent application questions) and the community environment which ntributed to and/or resulted from these undertakings. Insure the following points are covered: 1. The most basic challenges and concerns of the communit 2. Extent and nature of citizen participation in community improvement effort 3. Degree of success in realizing community goals; an 4. Success in including diverse populations in all phases of community improvement. The City of Southlake became an incorporated city in September 1956. The current year -long 40th anniversary celebration commemorates Southlake's past as well as Southlake's future. From its origins in 1845, when pioneers settled the area and formed the Lonesome Dove Community, Southlake has primarily been a rural community. The completion of nearby Grapevine Lake in the 1950's brought moderate growth to the area. During the 1970's and 1980's, growth was slow due to lack of quality water and wastewater systems, but the completion of the City's first municipal wastewater lines in 1990, the expansion of highways and roads linking the Dallas and Fort Worth metro areas, and the development of Fort Worth's Alliance Airport, brought new life to this small city. Today, the City of Southlake has emerged as one of the fastest growing and most desirable communities in the Dallas/Fort Worth metroplex and Texas. From 1990 to 1996, Southlake led the area in population growth, with more than a 100 percent increase from 7,082 to 14,950 residents. This tremendous growth has posed many challenges and concerns to both city officials and residents. City leaders must continuously balance a multitude of priorities and demands -- meeting infrastructure needs, constructing a "downtown" area, meeting the city's need for library facilities. recruiting quality businesses, and managing the traffic problems that come with urban development -- while also continuing the high quality of life residents have come to expect. This high quality of life includes master planned residential developments, blue ribbon schools, growing parks and recreation activities, and a budding commercial base. City officials must meet the demands of a rapidly changing city while also striving to preserve the rural, hometown atmosphere that has long been part of the Southlake heritage. Residents, old-timers ,is well as newcomers, have felt threatened by the rapid growth and have caused city officials to listen more carefully, look harder, and plan diligently for Southlake's future. Citizen participation is at the core of determining Southlake's future. Planning for growth, City leaders have developed a comprehensive master plan which includes land use, thoroughfare construction, park development, water/wastewater plans, and landscaping and tree preservation. Residents have an active voice in these plans through numerous public hearings, work sessions, and meetings sponsored by the Southlake Program for the Involvement of Neighborhoods (SPIN). As an example, the Parks, Recreation and Open Space Master Plan was approved on November 19, 1996, after 10 months and 17 public meetings held by the Parks and Recreation Board, two city-wide meetings hosted by SPIN, and public hearings with both the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council. The process, although long and sometimes tedious, ensured a multitude of interests were considered in the final plan, including soccer, baseball, tennis, basketball, cycling, running, and equestrian uses. This same proactive approach has been used to improve the quality of life for Southlake's senior citizens and youth. A Youth Parks and Recreation Board was recently formed so Southlake's youth would have a voice in Parks and Recreation activities. The Senior Advisory Commission and City leaders are considering the renovation of an old house for a senior recreation center. Other community -based organizations that directly affect Southlake's future include: Keep Southlake Beautiful (a certified Keep America Beautiful affiliate), Joint Utilization Committee (which explores sharing of resources between the city and school district), and an active Library Committee, Historical Society, and Southlake Sister Cities. The pinnacle of citizen involvement in Southlake is the SPIN organization. SPIN helps to enhance and encourage two-way communication between City leaders and residents, while ensuring that the diverse needs and desires of individual neighborhoods will be heard. The participation and involvement of the residents of Southlake has contributed immensely to the success and betterment of the community. The degree of this success is demonstrated by the award winning schools, quality residential and commercial growth of the community, and the nnovative programs developed by community leaders. 5C-20 1997 All -America City and Community Award Application - Page 3 1. On the next two pages, assess how well your community is doing based on each of NCL's ten Civic Index components (Review carefully the Civic Index included with application). Support your claims with examples. Please be candid and include only positive assessments, but negative ones, indicating what is being done to overcome weaknesses." A. Citizen Participation The demographics of Southlake perhaps explains the natural tendency of its residents to get involved in their city. City Council meetings routinely have 20-30 residents in attendance to voice their opinions on pending matters. In its three years of existence, the Southlake Program for the Involvement of Neighborhoods (SPIN) has been a key factor in this process. From the SPIN ranks, four former representatives have been elected to City Council and several others now serve on other boards. More than 60 citizens participated on a municipal complex planning committee, along with staff and architects, to design a new Southlake city hall. A citizen Library Committee represented Southlake in a feasibility study of a tri-city library. The Master Thoroughfare Plan revision underwent 21 public meetings to ensure as much citizen participation as necessary. B. Community Leadership The leadership of Southlake continues to push the city to high standards. Planning issues routinely involve a number of boards, non-profit groups, and elected bodies. The City Council and school board hold quarterly meetings to discuss joint use possibilities, future construction plans, and other issues. The Park Board and Keep Southlake Beautiful (KSB), a non-profit organization, mutually plan park beautification and litter pick-up events. Leadership i! continually developed through SPIN, the Southlake Youth Action Commission and Youth Park Board. Jointly sponsored by the city and Chamber, Leadership Southlake has graduated more than 60 people from six classes, half of whom are now active on council, boards, and civic organizations within Southlake. The Municipal Complex Planning committee was an unheard-of step in community participation in a traditionally staff -driven process. C. Government Performance Southlake citizens tend to be well-educated, professional people who expect above -average performance, openness, -d accountability from their government. Three bond upgrades in the past four years and budget presentation .ards from the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) attest to the city's excellent financial management. Senior management and professional staff include many with advanced degrees; several holding key leadership positions in their professional associations. The city's approach to joint use (sharing of facilities between the school district and city to reduce tax burden) was highlighted by a Government Services Television Network (GSTN) video, resulting in a number of requests for information from across the country. A Code of Ethics and Conduct, applicable to council, boards, commissions, and city staff, was adopted by the City Council in 1995. D. Volunteerism and Philanthropy Adventure Alley, Southlake's only playground, was built by more than 2700 volunteers working three shifts a day for six days. More than $140,000 in money, labor and building materials was donated by area businesses, including four who donated $10,000 each. Keep Southlake Beautiful and Sister Cities have each been the beneficiaries of fundraisers by business groups such as the Women's Division of the Chamber of Commerce. This philanthropic gesture has allowed them to leverage their city sponsored funding and increase their program effectiveness for the community. KSB's Adopt -A -Street program has more than 100 volunteers keeping 26 miles of city streets and 10 miles of state high«ays litter -free. E. Intergroup Relations Although Southlake is not yet enriched by racial or ethnic diversity, differences exist in terms of population age, length of residency, and economic status. In addition, many new residents have come from other states, each with differing political climates and government structures, resulting in a kind of "geographic -based" cultural and philosophical diversity. SPIN has helped bridge these differences through neighborhood communication and representative diversity. SPIN is also seeking to strengthen its ties to the Senior Advisory Board and Youth Action "-)mmission to further enhance communication. An active Sister Cities organization just celebrated the fifth year of Nowrelationship with Toyoma. Japan. Exchange delegations are sent to Japan twice a year, with school and city representatives accompanying the delegates. Other opportunities for sister city relationships are also being explored. 5C-21 1997 All -America City and Community Award Application - Page 4 F. Civic Education '-outhlake leaders believe that effective citizen participation and civic education also extends to the youth of the immunity. By involving youth, parents are more likely to be aware of issues facing the community, and the youth who participate, learn values and skills that will enable them to be better citizens in whatever community they live. To this end, Southlake has established a Youth Action Commission, with representatives from grades 7-12, to advise the mayor on youth issues and to initiate civic projects. A Youth Parks and Recreation Board was established by ordinance, and SPIN has a youth representative position also established by ordinance. Adult civic education has been fostered through SPIN -initiated candidates' forums, cable channel interviews, and voter registration drives. The Chamber and city co-sponsor the Leadership Southlake program. G. Community Information Sharing Being a small city in the heart of the Dallas -Fort Worth metroplex, Southlake cannot rely on the traditional media formats to disseminate information, but the city's commitment is evident by the hiring of a full time public information officer in 1996. The city produces a monthly newsletter (read by 89% of the residents according to a recent survey), a weekly "City Manager's Report" which is mailed to SPIN reps and placed in city hall, and regular bulletin board updates and special programming on the city cable channel. An Internet homepage has also been recently developed. SPIN serves as a major conduit of information, as well as being the catalyst for neighborhood and city-wide meetings to discuss development issues, city master plan updates, and other items. Welcome packets for new residents include a "Directory of City and Community Services," and this information has also been included on the city's website. H. Capacity for Cooperation and Consensus Building Community issues in Southlake are typically handled through the cooperation and problem -solving efforts of many different participants. The Joint Utilization Committee provides a mechanism for city and school district leaders to search for Pew and innovative ways to share resources, reducing the tax burden each much pass to its common -nstituency. Several city, school and business leaders have participated in dispute mediation training, and volunteer weir services to resolve community conflicts. This program has also been implemented in the schools through a highly successful peer mediation program for students. Recognizing the need for library facilities, but faced with many other critical needs as well, a citizens' library committee has explored the possibility of a joint venture with two neighboring cities. 1. Community Vision and Pride Citizens of Southlake are proud to live in this community, many being drawn to this area because of its rural charm and unique residential development with an emphasis on preserving and enhancing open space. City leaders are continually reminded by residents that they do not want Southlake to become like any other city. Tree preservation, extensive landscaping, and architectural uniqueness, are just some of the qualities citizens demand to maintain the uniqueness of Southlake. This is reflected in their support for organizations like Keep Southlake Beautiful, and the strict land development regulations enacted by city councils. Plans are underway for development of a 130 acre tract as a "downtown" area, complete with office buildings, sidewalk cafes, a new city hall, and restaurants and shopping areas. This development will take at least ten years, but is indicative of the desire by residents and officials to build something truly unique. J. Regional Cooperation Southlake was instrumental in developing and sustaining the Northeast Leadership Forum and Metroport Cities Partnership which strives to promote and enhance economic growth in the northeast Tarrant County region. The value of these regional efforts was demonstrated by the success of the Metroport 114 Partnership, which obtained $66 million in state highway funding. The success of a tri-city teen court program, which also includes two school districts and is administered by the city of Southlake, led to a fourth city and third school district participating in this regional venture. Public safety concerns over the opening of the new Texas Motor Speedway has led to a regional alition of numerous northeast Tarrant County cities developing a regional traffic control plan for race days. wouthlake was also instrumental in piloting a regional water infrastructure development plan with Fort Worth and northeast Tarrant County cities. 5C-22 1997 All -America City and Community Award Application - Page 5 2. NCL believes a strong civic infrastructure provides the skills and processes for a community to effectively address important Kcal issues. Using the ten components of NCL's Civic Index as a guide, discuss how your community's civic infrastructure is ping the community address its key challenges. Give examples of how your community has encouraged: I. Collaboration between community sectors; 2. Broad -based citizen involvement; an 3. Shared decision making among diverse segments of the population. The City of Southlake enjoys a high level of participation by its residents in city and community affairs. Citizen groups actively participate in the Southlake Program for the Involvement of Neighborhoods (SPIN), through which residents work with the development and business community, the Chamber of Commerce, and non- profit organizations to ensure meaningful resident participation in decision -making and in projects beneficial to the entire community. SPIN has broad -based citizen participation, with more than 80% of Southlake residents saying thev believe SPIN is beneficial to their neighborhood and community, and over 30% reporting they actively participate in the program. Over 1,200 residents have attended neighborhood meetings since the program's inception, including youth (fourth through twelfth grades), seniors, long-time residents, and newcomers. SPIN provides a strong mechanism for community involvement in addressing local issues. Recognizing that certain segments of the city's population may have special needs, city leaders established a Senior Advisory Board and a Youth Action Commission. These boards serve as advisors to the mayor and city council to address critical needs and issues facing a growing senior population and already large youth segment. In addition. a Youth Parks and Recreation Board was established in 1996 to further address the shortage of youth related activities available in Southlake, and to offer the youth themselves the opportunity to develop solutions. Many important projects currently underway and recently completed, would not be possible without strong collaboration between community sectors. For example, the City of Southlake worked with its neighboring communities and a plethora of businesses with economic interests along the State Highway 114 corridor to secure *.ate funding for improvements to the roadway, an effort which had been unsuccessful in previous years. This collaboration was organized by the Metroport Cities Partnership, a non-profit organization comprised of eleven cities, several businesses, and Southlake residents who have an interest in the S.H. 114 corridor. The effort ultimately involved school children, chambers, cities, and residents from all sectors of the community. A large community playground was constructed by Southlake volunteers and funded through donations by businesses and individuals. This was a project organized and implemented by a Leadership Southlake class. Leadership Southlake is a joint program offered to residents by the Southlake Chamber of Commerce and the City of Southlake. Since its first class graduated in 1990, many participants have gone on to elected school and municipal offices, appointed boards and commissions, and community and civic leadership programs. Perhaps the city's most important challenge is growth. Community leaders and staff rely on Southlake's civic infrastructure to attain broad based participation to work through growth issues. Southlake Citizens for Better Roads was formed to identify and prioritize a capital project plan for roadways and subsequently worked toward the passage of a bond election. Citizens Advocating Parks in Southlake was instrumental in identifying an alternate source of funding for park development and construction, and led the way for successful passage of the additional '/ cent sales tax. To date, approximately $8.5 million has become available for park development due to their efforts. Over 60 residents participated in the Municipal Complex Planning Project, through which volunteers planned a new City Hall facility, analyzed financial capabilities for affordability, and reviewed joint use possibilities with Carroll Independent School District. Over 15 residents participated on a Council -appointed Library Committee to compare the advantages of building a stand alone library with the advantages of a joint use library with two neighboring cities. Residents also volunteer with a variety of community groups, whose missions help the community address its key challenges, such as Keep Southlake Beautiful, Southlake Sister Cities, and the Historical Society. 5C-23 1997 All -America City and Community Award Application - Page 6 Part H Part I1 requires a description of three recent community -driven projects that have significantly impacted the community since 1994. The projects should illustrate the community's ability to 1) anticipate problems by proactively dealing with community challenges, and/or 2) respond in collaborative and resourceful ways to a current critical problem. (Please note that you can either have all projects dealing with anticipated problems OR ail focusing on current challenges OR a combination of the two.) In addition, all projects selected should exemplify extraordinary civic accomplishments for your community, made possible by collaborative efforts of individuals and the public, private and nonprofit sectors. 5C-24 1997 All -America City and Community Award Application - Page 7 IA. Briefly describe the first (Project 1) of the three projects that has significantly impacted the community since 1994. 'ie Metroport 114 Partnership is an example of the public, private and nonprofit sectors, and local residents joining ■erces across jurisdictional boundaries to achieve a common goal: improving State Highway 114 for continued economic growth, safety and residents' quality of life. City officials had lobbied the state since 1987 for highway improvements but each year, improvements were delayed by a lack of state funding. In 1996, city officials, recognizing the regional impact of this important highway corridor, formed the Metroport 114 Partnership representing 1 1 cities, two counties, hundreds of businesses and more than 500,000 residents. Southlake is a growing city along S.H. 114, an 18-mile stretch of road connecting the Dallas -Fort Worth International Airport, second busiest airport in the U.S., and Fort Worth Alliance Airport, the first industrial airport and intermodal inland port in the Western Hemisphere. The Partnership was formed to address improvements to this mostly two-lane "economic lifeline" and convince the Texas Transportation Commission to allocate funds to S.H. 114 to alleviate traffic congestion. This congestion is predicted to worsen because of tremendous residential and commercial growth in the region and the opening of the Texas Motor Speedway in April 1997, seating 200,000 spectators. Without the much needed overpasses, frontage roads, interchanges and additional lanes, the 5.5 miles of S.H. 114 that runs through Southlake, including four major intersections, will continue to pose a safety hazard to residents traveling to and from work and children being transported to and from school. Through regional cooperation and grassroots efforts, the Partnership sought to address this important regional concern by drawing state attention to this critical problem. 1 B. What prompted the community to undertake this project?. The Metroport 114 Partnership represents one of the fastest growing areas in the state of Texas. The 18-mile stretch of highway is the only east -west thoroughfare in the area and has prompted enormous commercial, industrial, and residential growth. The Partnership believes if the highway is not improved, it will choke economic development in the communities along S.H. 114 because of traffic gridlock. Thev ultimately fear businesses and residents will begin to turn away. The 1990 corridor traffic averaged approximately 26,000 vehicles per day in Southlake, while the 1996 average corridor traffic yielded 46,000 vehicles traveling through Southlake per day. The state projects this will .rease to 110,000 by 2015! From 1990 to 1996, the city's population increased by more than 100 percent, from r082 to 14,950 residents. Since 1990, about $5 billion in development has occurred along the corridor, more than 25,000 jobs have been created, and approximately 10,000 homes have been built. A study commissioned by the Partnership asserts that economic development in the area could stop unless highway improvements are started soon. The report, "Explosive Growth in the 114 Corridor," shows a link between infrastructure and the economy, thus demonstrating the economic consequences to the area if S.H. 114 is not improved. Another concern is that when the highway becomes congested, motorists will seek alternate routes through neighborhood streets, endangering the quality of life and safety of residents. 1C. What significant impacts has this project had on the community? Include quantifiable results as well as changes in the way the community confronts critical local issues. Southlake officials had appeared before the Texas Transportation Commission in 1993 and 1995, but were unable to secure funding. The Metroport 114 Partnership brought communities together for a combined strength and louder voice through cooperation among cities, participation of businesses, and involvement of residents. With 5.5 miles of highway and four major intersections, the City of Southlake has the most at stake and the most to gain from the future of S.H. 114. Quality of life, safety, and continued economic growth are some of the critical issues confronting the city. City officials addressed these issues by informing the community and recruiting support through neighborhood meetings, public service announcements, a video on the city's cable channel, a "1 14" telephone hotline, the city newsletter, petitions, buttons and bumper stickers, and encouraging residents to join a bus trip to Austin. Total contributions were: businesses - $21,000; local governments - $39,000; metroport cities (non-profit organization) - $5,000; and individuals - $5,000. Through these donations, the Partnership recouped the $70,000 spent on the project. which included a promotional video, informational brochure, economic study, mailers, and the trip to Austin. After the June 1996 presentation by Metroport leaders, along with a delegation of 250 supporters, the Commission gave top ority to four major projects and Priority 2 status to another intersection, totaling more than $66 million in state 'Mriding over the next three years. 5C-25 1997 All -America City and Community Award Application - Page 8 1 D. What attempts were made to involve the citizens directly affected by the projects in program development and to what Pxtent were they successful? How were diverse segments of the population involved in the decision -making process? What feral difficulties were encountered? Leaders of the Partnership realized that citizen involvement is essential to the success of a long-term grassroots campaign. The Partnership began spreading the word through a speakers' bureau to area Chambers of Commerce and other groups in each city. A petition generated more than 20,000 signatures in support of improvements to S.H. 114. Hundreds of bumper stickers were distributed. Local school districts launched a letter writing drive, sending sample letters home with students for their parents to write. Local elementary schoolchildren were invited to draw pictures of scenes they recalled of S.H. 114, responding with colorful pictures of accidents, cars being towed and dead dogs. The drawings were sent to Austin as part of the presentation to the Texas Transportation Commission. Southlake's SPIN representatives teamed up with the Partnership to sponsor meetings for residents to learn the history of S.H. 114 funding, future plans for the highway, and the Partnership's presentation in Austin. A 10-minute, $20,000 informational video, produced by the local electric company, was an instrumental part of the presentation to the Commission. Area Chambers of Commerce sponsored buses to make the trip to Austin. The area's leading newspaper also gave their support with an eight -day, front page series on S.H. 114 and the Metroport 114 Partnership's efforts. 1 E. For project 1, list the principal groups and organizations involved and the number of members participating in these efforts. - Summarize their contribution to the project. Name No. Participants Contribution Metroport 114 Partnership 79 Provided leadership, recruited support, and raised contributions for SH 114 improvements. Southlake Chamber of Commerce 30 Organized bus trip to Austin; served as focal point for business community involvement in project. 'DIN 16 SPIN reps informed residents of importance of improving SH 114, W helped with letter writing campaign, held city-wide informational meetings. 1 F. For project 1, identify three individuals who were active leaders. (Include leaders from the public, private and nonprofit sectors.) Name/Title Organization/Address Telephone Gary Fickes City of Southlake/Metroport (817) 329-0411 Former Mayor 2875 Exchange Boulevard Southlake, TX 76092 Sonny Rhodes TU Electric (817) 481-0510 Customer Service Manager P.O. Box 1329 Grapevine, TX 76099 Bob Mundlin Southlake Chamber of Commerce (817) 481-7133 211 West Franklin Grapevine, TX 76051 5C-26 1997 All -America City and Community Award Application - Page 9 2A. Briefly describe the second main project (Project 2) that has significantly impacted the community since 1994. "dventure Alley is a unique playground designed by, and for, Southlake's children. Built during the week of . ptember 19-24, 1995, this project represents one of Southlake's most impressive community efforts. First proposed by the 1993 Leadership Southlake class as its advocacy project, the Southlake Playground Initiative slowly gained momentum through the efforts of local business leaders, the Chamber of Commerce, city elected and appointed leaders, city staff, and the residents and children of Southlake. The effort began in earnest with Design Day on September 19, 1994. More than 500 people attended the community meeting where the results of the childrens' design committee were unveiled. An organizing committee of 20 subcommittee co-chairs, and more than a hundred volunteers, planned and organized fundraisers, recruited volunteers, solicited donations of money and materials, and arranged child care and food service. One year later, after a five month delay to the initial project construction date, hundreds of volunteers descended on Bicentennial Park to make this dream become a reality. On Sunday, September 24, 1995, dedication ceremonies were held. In the end, more than $140,000 in money and materials was donated, and almost 2700 volunteers worked 3 shifts a day for 6 days, to build Southlake's first, and still only, playground for its children on a 1.3 acre site in Bicentennial Park. 2B. What prompted the community to undertake this project?. The idea of building a special playground for the children of Southlake was conceived by the 1993 Leadership Southlake class. Recognizing that Southlake was, and still is, a fast-growing community with a large number of small children, the class believed that such a project would address a critical need for the city by providing a high quality playground facility. At the time, Southlake had only one 17 acre park and no playground facilities, for a city of 12,850 residents, many of whom were young families with children. A citizen survey, performed in conjunction with the Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Master Plan, revealed that 68% of those surveyed felt that the park and .reation facilities near their homes were inadequate. When asked to prioritize the particular type of facilities !wired, playgrounds were ranked third, behind only hike and bike trails, and nature areas. The second reason for undertaking this project was the appeal of minimizing the "out-of-pocket" expenses to the city and its taxpayers. The City proposed building the playground on existing city park land, and the cost of materials would be offset by volunteer labor and donated money, tools and building materials. The third reason for the project could be found in the promotional brochures of the architecture firm: "up to half of the volunteer built projects ... come into being primarily because people realize how much the experience will strengthen their communities." Southlake's future leaders greatly desired to develop a community spirit and cooperation that would result in a lasting benefit. 2C. What significant impacts has this project had on the community? Include quantifiable results as well as changes in the way the community confronts critical local issues. The volunteer effort needed to make Adventure Alley a reality, resulted in a new sense of community cooperation and pride. Because of the tremendous growth in the community, and the transition from rural community to upscale suburb, community leaders realized this project had the potential to bring diverse segments of the community together for the sake of a common goal -- the needs of Southlake's children. More than 120 businesses contributed in various ways, with the Southlake Chamber of Commerce and four other businesses each donating $10,000 or more. Typical of the community pride, one of these business owners, a resident of Southlake when it was still a small farming community, spent the entire week at the construction site on a tractor, side by side with residents who had lived in Southlake less than a year! The playground initiative project resulted in old and young alike, newcomers and "old- timers," bringing together more than $140,000 in donations and 2700 volunteers working for six days in an old- fashioned "barn -raising" effort, to construct a playground on a 1.3 acre site in the center of the community. Eighteen months later, Adventure Alley is still the only playground to Southlake's children, and is the centerpiece of the City's only developed park. Continuing the volunteer spirit begun on this project, periodic major maintenance and upkeep is w being done by the "Friends of Adventure Alley," and the 1996-97 Leadership Southlake class has proposed the construction of community -built pavilions next to the playground. 5C-27 1997 All -America City and Community Award Application - Page 10 2D. What attempts were made to involve the citizens directly affected by the projects in program development and to what extent were they successful? How were diverse segments of the population involved in the decision -making process? What general f iculties were encountered? -Design Day on September 19, 1994, officially kicked off the active push to raise money and recruit volunteers. Prior to Design Day, children representing the three elementary schools had worked with the architect to design their ideal playground. Unique, even to this company's standards, was the heavy emphasis on handicapped access. A woman with a handicapped child served on the Special Needs Committee and was instrumental in ensuring that the playground would be enjoyed by all of Southlake's children. Construction week planning and organizing involved volunteers from the Chamber of Commerce, local businesses, churches, schools, city staff, SPIN representatives and neighborhood homeowner associations. Initial plans for a construction week of April 24-30, 1995, had to be postponed due to a lack of money and volunteer workers. The delay, although discouraging, allowed for a regrouping effort and even stronger push to accomplish the project. When construction week arrived, so did the volunteers -- from the many residents who showed up, to the Church of Latter Day Saints who sent almost a hundred skilled craftsmen, to the Tarrant County prisoners who provided labor, to the Texas Air National Guard members who set up tents, to City staff members who in some cases, took vacation time to work on the site. All contributed to the huge success of Adventure Alley. 2E. For project 2, list the principal groups and organizations involved and the number of members participating in these efforts., Summarize their contribution to the project. Name No. Participants Adventure Alley Planning Committe 20 Local individual volunteers 2700 Southlake Chamber of Commerce 30 Contribution Project design, publicity. fund-raising, construction week organization and planning. Construction, child care, food service. Volunteers from business community, fund-raising efforts, publicity; serve as focal point for business sector involvement. 2F. For project 2, identify three individuals who were active leaders. (Include leaders from the public, private and nonprofit sectors.) Name/Title Organization/Address Telephone Kaye Joesten Adventure Alley Planning Committee (817) 481-1545 Project General Co -Chair 1339 Ten Bar Trail Southlake, TX 76092 Shana Yelverton City of Southlake/Adv Alley Cmte (817) 481-5581 Assistant City Manager 1725 E. Southlake Boulevard Southlake, TX 76092 Barry Emerson Chamber Board Member/Adv Alley Board Member (817) 488-5544 Bank President P.O. Box 92840 Southlake, TX 76092 5C-28 1997 All -America City and Community Award Application - Page 11 3A. Briefly describe the third main project (Project 3) that has significantly impacted the community since 1994. "DIN is a formal citizen participation program, created by ordinance, to facilitate communication between Southlake `,,,ighborhoods, city elected officials, staff, and other participants in Southlake's local government process. Southlake is divided into 16 SPIN "neighborhoods," with a captain selected by each and formally appointed by the Council. A youth delegate ensures participation by Southlake's children from fourth through twelfth grade. There are few prescribed rules by which neighborhoods must operate, giving them the flexibility to address issues and concerns unique to their own neighborhood. SPIN neighborhoods regularly hold meetings during which they discuss issues of importance to the residents of their neighborhood, such as development, infrastructure, city planning issues, environmental concerns, and community service projects. Many of the SPIN representatives produce newsletters or organize volunteers to help disseminate information. Simply put, SPIN involves Southlake residents in all aspects of the community and in the decision -making process of the City. The City has made a commitment to keep SPIN leaders informed, and accomplishes this by providing copies of Council agendas, P&Z agendas, news releases, and notification of any zoning change requests within their neighborhood. City staff also produces a weekly City Manager's Report and maintains a cable channel bulletin board to assist SPIN reps in keeping up with city and community news. SPIN works closely with the City, but continues to expand as the program matures, which has resulted in SPIN becoming more autonomous and involved in many new aspects of the community. The program has become a solid model of citizenship, through which the city and community embrace one another to solve problems._ 3B. What prompted the community to undertake this project?. Since 1991, Southlake has been one of the fastest growing cities in the Dallas -Fort Worth metroplex. With an annualized growth rate of more than 10%, many new residents have come into the city. In addition, with 23 square miles of land area, there is a wide variety of needs and concerns among the many neighborhoods of the community. City leaders saw the need to include all citizens in the decision making process, giving them expanded opportunities for meaningful and convenient participation in community affairs. Of equal importance was the desire to tap into the pool of experience and enthusiasm of the many new residents who might not otherwise become quickly involved. Council created SPIN to facilitate communication and create a strong partnership between the city and its W'ighborhoods. Typically residents became involved in the process only during "neighborhood crises," that is, only when a controversial issue prompted them to mobilize for a common purpose. Through SPIN, Southlake residents have a quick and direct means of access to city officials. SPIN has also served as a vehicle for information transfer - both directions - which has enriched the decision -making process. Through SPIN, members of the community get needed information, ask questions, and otherwise participate in meaningful ways. In addition, SPIN has also provided an easy means for residents to get involved in volunteerism and community service. This aspect of SPIN has become stronger as the program has grown and matured. 3C. What significant impacts has this project had on the community? Include quantifiable results as well as changes in the way the community confronts critical local issues. SPIN has dramatically increased residents' participation in city issues, particularly growth issues. Since 1994, 131 SPIN neighborhood meetings have been held, with 2,797 attending. Topics have included development regulations, master plans, infrastructure, the City Charter, public safety issues, garbage service, etc. Zoning cases and development plans are the most popular subjects, with developers and builders working hand -in -hand with residents prior to the case making its way to the P&Z or Council_ City survey results in 1996 shove that 82.7% of all residents believe SPIN is beneficial (70% in 1994) and just over 30% report they are involved. Representatives worked with the city, the business community, Chamber of Commerce, non-profit groups, and the school district to raise funds, gather petition signatures and promote a letter writing campaign seeking state funding for a major highway project. Many attended the state meeting. Ultimately efforts were successful. The state allocated more funds than originally requested! SPIN sponsored several "informed voter initiatives," including a voter registration drive, a candidates' forum, and worked with the high school broadcast journalism class to produce a "Meet the Candidates" video for the city's cable channel. Four SPIN reps have become elected officials, and many now serve on boards. Reps also ticipated in community service projects, such as meal coordination during construction of a community �Myground, toy drives, and fundraisers. Virtually no community project is pursued without SPIN involvement. 5C-29 1997 All -America City and Community Award Application - Page 12 3D. What attempts were made to involve the citizens directly affected by the projects in program development and to what extent were they successful? How were diverse segments of the population involved in the decision -making process? What neral difficulties were encountered? The ordinance governing SPIN deliberately provides maximum flexibility for implementation in the neighborhoods. An early Town Hall meeting generated citizen ideas which were then incorporated into the SPIN program; development of the program has continued with the development by SPIN representatives of a mission statement, annual goals, a "Code of Conduct," and organizational procedures. Strategies to improve citizen participation are constantly monitored. SPIN has seen an increase of attendees at SPIN meetings as follows: 448 in 1994, 526 in 1995, and 1,800 in 1996. Already eight meetings have been held in 1997. SPIN leaders meet quarterly with the Council to discuss important issues, and work very closely with the development community to ensure that projects are developed with the least impact to neighborhoods and that residents are aware of impending growth. SPIN representatives and participants represent all ages and socioeconomic status. The program includes reps from 16 "neighborhoods" from all over the city, including a youth and senior delegate, as well as reps from new and older residential areas. The Council designed SPIN to be an autonomous program with representatives determining their own priorities and charting their own course. As SPIN has matured, it has indeed evolved to effectively meet the needs of its citizen participants. 3E. For project 3, list the principal groups and organizations involved and the number of members participating in these efforts. Summarize their contribution to the project. Name No. Participants Contribution City Council/SPIN Representatives 25 Self-governing body providing organizational support, volunteer hours to ensure participation. City of Southlake Staff 15 Provide administrative support; implement ideas; provide information. �Pliv 3000 Neighborhood Participation 3F. For project 3, identify three individuals who were active leaders. (Include leaders from the public, private and nonprofit sectors.) Name/Title Gary Fawks Councilmember/Former SPIN rep David Baltimore SPIN Standing Cmte Chair Shana Yelverton Assistant City Manager Organization/Address Telephone City Council (817) 424-1999 330 Ravenaux Drive Southlake, TX 76092 SPIN (817)488-3593 1368 Holland Hill Southlake, TX 76092 City of Southlake (817) 481-5581 1725 E. Southlake Boulevard Southlake, TX 76092 5C-30 OFFICERS Senator Bill Bradley, Chairman Anna Faith Jones, Vice Chairman Albert C. Gonzales, Treasurer Heather McLeod, Secretary Christopher T. Gates, President Gloria Rubio-Cortes, Vice President DIRECTORS Gigi Armbrecht Don Benninghoven Robert C. Bobb John Claypool R. Scott Fosler Hubert Guest Dr. John Stuart Hall Dr. Theodore Hershberg James Howard Curtis Johnson Daniel Kemmis James E. Kunde Dr. David Mathews jipl,art H. Mulfer ter Murray ane Narver John B. Olsen Mark Pisano Janis Purdy Robert Rawson, Jr. Juan Sepulveda Carrie Thornhill Arturo Vargas David Vidal Dr. Henry R. Winkler Linda J. Wong HONORARY LIFE DIRECTORS FORMER CHAIRMEN Terrell Blodgett Hon. Henry G. Cisneros John W. Gardner James L. Hetland, Jr. Hon. George Latimer Han. Cecil Morgan Han. Terry Sanford Hon. William W. Scranton Hon. William F. Winter NATIONAL CIVIC LEAGUE 1445 MARKET STREET SUITE 300 VER, CO 80202-1717 J03)571-4343 (303) 571-4404 E-mail: ncl®ncl.org WWW: hUp://www.nci.org/ncl September 30, 1997 Mr. Kevin Hugman Community Services Manager City of Southlake 1725 East Southlake Blvd. Southlake, TX 76092-6092 Dear Mr. Hugman: (G , rZ ir! �t t r NOV 1 8 i99 j '� OF='Cc Thank you for applying for the 1997 All -America City Award. Enclosed is your application Evaluation Summary. It is based on a thorough review of your application, notes from the Screening Committee meeting, and the written and oral comments of members of the Screening Committee. As you know, the National Civic League received 120 applications for the 1997 All -America City Award. With so many outstanding applicants, the decisions of the Screening Committee are very difficult indeed. We have endeavored to make these Evaluation Summaries as helpful as possible to communities who want to understand why they were not selected as a Finalist this year, or how they might change their application if a future entry is contemplated. If you have any questions regarding the content of this summary, I would be pleased to discuss them with you. You can reach meat (303) 571-4343. Thank you again for supporting the All -America City Award Program through your participation. We look forward to seeing a future application from your community. Sincerely, � arole Bloom Director, All -America City Award Program Enclosure 5C-31 1997 ALL-AMERICA CITY AWARD EVALUATION Southlake, Texas The 1997 All -America City Award Screening Committee congratulates the citizens, businesses and public agencies of Southlake, Texas for their efforts in collaborative problem solving and _ substantial progress in community improvement. Willingness to face difficult situations and meet challenges in innovative and collaborative ways are the traits of All -America Cities. While all applicants feel they are worthy of this designation, the National Civic League names only ten each year. Nevertheless, we believe that the application process itself is an opportunity for communities to learn about their strengths and challenges and recognize their neighbors for the value they add to the entire community. We hope that this evaluation will provide insight into ways to further strengthen and enhance Southlake, Texas' collaborative spirit. The Civic Index assists communities in developing their problem -solving capacity by providing a method and a process for identifying their strengths and weaknesses, and then structuring collaborative approaches to solving shared problems. Including the Civic Index in the All - America City Award application allows communities to examine their civic infrastructure and determine how it has helped them address important local issues. Southlake is a community that has experienced 152% increase in population between 1980 and 1990. It has 1.5% of its population below the poverty level and 1.6% unemployment. Southlake is one of the fastest growing and most desirable communities in the Dallas -area. Priorities include infrastructure issues, constructing a "downtown," managing traffic, recruiting quality business and a need or library facilities. Southlake's comprehensive master plan involved citizens in the planning phase. A Youth Parks and Recreation Board ensures there is youth participation in decision -making. The Screening Committee felt that Southlake was an insular community, unconnected to other neighboring jurisdictions. The application implies a diverse sector, but is not explicit. The SPIN project showed good organization, however it seems to be too government -driven. Citizen participation could have been more explicit. Adventure Alley showed extensive volunteer involvement in the idea and implementation phases of the project. This playground project is good, but based on population, it seems like they ought to have more than one playground. 1445 MARKET STREET, SUITE 300, DENVER, CO 80202-1717. 303-571-4343 - FAX: 303-571-4404 5C-32 Page 2 . _ Southlake, Texas The Metroport 114 Partnership showed collaboration among the sectors and local residents. It was a good project description, however the Screening Committee asked if there was more citizen involvement in the implementation and follow up. The::highway project was commendable, however some members of the Screening Committee thought it was curious that so much of Southlake's future was built around a highway. The National Civic League wishes Southlake continued success in its efforts at community betterment, and we hope you will regard us as a future source of support, guidance and assistance in confronting and solving civic issues. And, while we encourage all communities to try again to receive recognition as an All -America City, repeat applicants are not guaranteed a designation. 5C-33 January 23, 1998 Ms. Carole Bloom Director, All -America City Award Program National Civic League 1445 Market Street, Suite 300 Denver, Colorado 80202-1717 Dear Ms. Bloom: We have received the notice advertising the applications for the 1998 All - America City awards. It is our intent to apply, but I have some questions I would like to have answered before doing so. On November 18, 1997, we received the Evaluation Summary for our 1997 All -America City Award application. We had looked forward to receiving some constructive comments regarding our application. Southlake had applied in 1995 and we appreciated the comments given in the evaluation summary that year. Unfortunately, the 1997 evaluation summary did not do us much good, but in fact raised serious questions about the process. The letter we received November 18, dated September 30, 1997, was after repeated calls to your organization to determine the status of the summaries and when they would be mailed. The delay raises questions that perhaps should be explored, but more importantly, the comments in the evaluation summary give Southlake little insight into why we were not selected as a finalist community. You wrote that the summary is "based on a thorough review of [our] application, notes from the Screening Committee meeting, and the written and oral comments of the Screening Committee." It appears that, based upon the following comments in your letter, our application received little more than a cursory glance. 5C-34 Ms. Carole Bloom National Civic League January 23, 1998 Page 2 of 6 (1) "The Screening Committee felt that Southlake was an insular community, unconnected to other neighboring jurisdictions. " How can this be? One of the projects we highlighted was a regional effort, led by Southlake, to lobby the state for much -needed improvements to a highway bisecting Southlake, but impacting the entire Northeast Tarrant County region. As described in our application, this effort involved 11 cities and two counties, scores of businesses, area chambers of commerce, and literally hundreds of volunteer residents of the participating cities, including elementary school children in eight cities and four school districts. Elsewhere in our application, we pointed out the participation of Southlake in studying a tri-city library, the success of a four -city teen court program initiated by Southlake, and the establishment of a northeast Tarrant County regional leadership program initiated by citizens of Southlake. There are several other examples cited in our application of not only Southlake's participation, but also leadership, in regional cooperation and planning. Was it read? (2) "The application implies a diverse sector, but is not explicit. " We were very explicit in our application in stating "Southlake is not yet enriched by racial or ethnic diversity, [but] differences exist in terms of population age, length of residency, and economic status." As pointed out in the community background section of our application, "[c]ity officials must meet the demands of a rapidly changing city while also striving to preserve the rural, hometown atmosphere . . . " As such, these differences can be just as much a challenge to bringing consensus and a common vision to all of the varying elements of a community as would other differences. I believe National Civic League President Chris Gates has said that diversity takes more forms than just ethnic and racial diversity. Is this belief shared by the NCL? It should also be noted that the racial/ethnic population figures on the application are from the 1990 census, and although it shows a white (non - Hispanic) population percentage of 96.3%, it would also reflect a population of 7,082 residents, less than half of the 1997 population! As such, the 1990 census information is suspect, but that is the best information we currently have available regarding ethnic and racial diversity. We had hoped that the Screening Committee would recognize this anomaly. 40, 5C-35 Ms. Carole Bloom National Civic League - January 23, 1998 • Page 3 of 6 (3) "The SPIN project showed good organization, however it seems to be too government -driven. Citizen participation could have been more explicit. " It would seem that any government which takes great pains, as we do, to involve its citizens in the decision -making process, would be applauded for its efforts, not criticized as making the program "too government -driven." As pointed out in the application, citizen participation is ongoing and proactive, unlike many cities where citizen participation is either reactive to crises or explicitly discouraged. Is SPIN government driven? No. It is legitimized by our City government, but it is citizen -driven. We feel that SPIN is a model program for citizen participation and the inclusion of citizens into the governing process. In the last several years I have attended many "empowering citizens" seminars and conferences sponsored by organizations such as the National League of Cities and the International City Management Association. I have heard of many examples across the country. None are more citizen -driven than SPIN. The Screening Committee's abject dismissal of SPIN as "too government driven" is disappointing to say the very least. (4) "[The Adventure Alley] project is good, but based on population, it seems like they ought to have more than one playground. " For two reasons, this comment hardly deserves reply. First, the fact that we had only one playground at the time, illustrates the many needs we have but cannot always meet in attempting to keep up with the explosive growth of the community! Secondly, this playground is not your typical metal and plastic jungle gym playground, but one that will last for many, many years. This being said, the main point of including this project in our application was not to illustrate a playground per se, but what it represented -- a massive volunteer effort of 2700 residents and hundreds of businesses, all coming together to give something to the children of the community. In a town of only 15,000 residents, this seems truly remarkable to us. (5) "The highway project was commendable, however some members of the Screening Committee thought it was curious that so much of Southlake's future was built around a highway. " Again, this comment baffles us. Those who are familiar with economic development and the growth dynamics of cities and towns, surely recognize 5C-36 Ms. Carole Bloom National Civic League January 23, 1998 .. Page 4 of 6 the importance highways and major transportation routes play in the very survival of a community. The history of our country holds numerous examples of towns that have died or become stagnant because of the devastating economic impact when they were bypassed by the interstate highway or railroad, or when the lack of proper attention led to transportation gridlock. Transportation is perhaps the most vital factor in economic development. Our application made an effort to illustrate the grave importance of this highway to not only Southlake, but also the greater Northeast Tarrant County region which includes better than 350,000 residents. If it were not _ such a tremendous regional concern, how does one explain the countless hours and efforts of eleven cities, two counties, scores of businesses and hundreds of residents, the private sector fundraising of more than $70,000 to support our lobbying effort, and ultimately the response of the state to fund the program at a higher level than we had requested in final recognition of the need? We point out these evaluation summary comments not for the purpose of arguing their merits, but rather to underscore our concern that Southlake's application was not given serious consideration. The All -America City Award (we believed) is to honor those communities "where neighbors pitch in together; places with a diverse collection of talents and people who dwell, not on problems of the past, but on opportunities of the present and possibilities of the future." [Quote from the opening paragraph of the 1997 application package.] Instead, it appears that the Screening Committee has judged our application not on its own merits, but rather on what the community is perceived to be, or not to be. We do not in any way deny the merits of those communities chosen as 1997 All -America City Award winners. Nevertheless, we note that (seemingly) more emphasis is given to reacting to such problems as homelessness, crime, under - education, unemployment, poverty, and racial intolerance than is given to proactively addressing them before the problem arises, and that community involvement and grassroots problem solving is only important when such selected problems already exist. Apparently, little merit is given to a proactive approach to such issues as teen drinking and drug abuse problems, library needs to prevent literacy problems, or community information sharing to preempt the type of divisiveness that can cause communities to lose their focus. 5C-37 Ms. Carole Bloom National Civic League January 23, 1998 Page S of 6 Southlake is in a unique situation. We are not only trying to address the needs of the community with resources that are stretched ever tighter, but we are building a city and community at the same time, and we are doing it with as open and shared a decision -making process as we possibly can! Along the way, we are attempting to address issues before they become problems, and we think we have been very successful! As you can surmise, I am extremely disappointed with the All -America City Award process. We are still hard at work building our community, and have accomplished much in the past year. Our citizens deserve that we apply again. However, if it is true that we must figuratively "bottom out" in some social morass, then rise above it, to be eligible to be called All -America City, then we will never make it. Quite frankly, the message your September 30 letter has sent to us seems out of place in light of the quotes from Senator Bradley, General Powell, and Mr. Choate in your 1998 advertising bulletin: • '`...grassroots democracy, and good old fashioned civic pride ... the glue that holds communities together and enables citizens to make those communities better places to live." • "...community action at the grassroots level..." as the only way "...to provide two million American youngsters... with the basic resources they need to make it in today's world." • "Community action at the grassroots level is what the All - America City Award program is all about - making a better future for all of our children." Since we became a home -rule City in 1987, we have shared and strived to put into practice the stated ideals of the NCL: • to create a community that works for everyone • to promote active involvement of citizens in the governance of their community • to demonstrate belief in the power of broad -based citizen participation • to commit to the principles of collaborative problem solving and consensus - based decision making. Are these ideals if put into practice enough to qualify for the All -America City award? If not, please let us and others like us know. If it is not politically 5C-38 Ms. Carole Bloom National Civic League January 23, 1998 Page 6 of 6 correct for the NCL to grant recognition to cities like Southlake, then so inform us. Likewise, if your September 30 letter and its belittling characterization of Southlake is someone's misstatement or misreading of our application, and/or if the screening committee's comments are an indication of our failure to adequately explain our application, let us know that also. Again, please do not interpret this letter as sour grapes because we were not selected. The achievements of the award winning cities speak for themselves. The purpose of this letter is to express a genuine concern about the feedback we received. The courtesy of a response to this letter would be appreciated. Sincerely, Curtis E. Hawk City Manager cc: National Civic League Board of Directors Southlake All -America City Award Application Committee 5C-39 LEAGUE OFFICERS Senator Bill Bradley, Chairman Anna Faith Jones. Vice Chairman Albert C. Gonzales. Treasurer Heather McLeod. Secretary Christopher T. Gates. President Gloria Rubio-Cortes. Vice President DIRECTORS Gigi Armbrecht Robert C. Bobb John Claypool R. Scott Foster Steve Glikbarg Or. J. Eugene Grigsby, III Hubert Guest Or John Stuart Hall Dr. Lenneal J. HenCerson. Jr. Or Tneodore Hersnberg James Howard Curtis Johnson Hon. George Latimer ^a id Mathews H. Muller er Murray Betty Jane Narver Mark Pisano Jams Purdy Robert Rawson. Jr Juan Sepulveda Carrie Thornhill Arturo Vargas David Vidal Linda J. Wong HONORARY LIFE DIRECTORS 6 FORMER BOARD CHAIRS John W. Gardner ('93-'96) Han. Henry G. Cisneros ('89-'92) Hon. William F Winter ('88-'89,13) Terrell Blodgett ('87-'88) Hon. Terry Sanford ('86-'87) James L. Hetland, Jr. ('82-'86) Hon. William W. Scranton ('70-73) Hon. Cecil Morgan ('56-59) NATIONAL CIVIC LEAGUE National Headquarters 1445 MARKET STREET SUITE 300 DENVER, CO 80202-1717 Tel. (303) 571-4343 FAX: (303) 571-4404 mail: ncl®ncl.org hHp://www.ncl.org/nci Washington, DC Office Tel.: 202-783-2961 FAX:202-347-2161 4- 30, 1998 Mr. Curtis E. Hawk City Manager City of Southlake 1725 East Southlake Boulevard Southlake, TX 76092 Dear Mr. Hawk: j Q giRRl,QT, s 1 i APR_ 7 M8 �, t F Ci, I want to thank you for your thoughtful letter of January 23, 1998 regarding the evaluation of Southlake's 1997 All -America City Application. As you might guess, writing these evaluations is a very difficult process, on which I will elaborate. Each application submitted is reviewed in depth by two members of the Screening Committee prior to the three-day meeting. In addition, a summary of every application and projects is sent to all members of the Screening Committee. At the meeting, each primary reviewer of the application makes an oral presentation to the balance of the Screening Committee (approximately 23 people with similar credentials as those who serve of the AAC Jury), based on the AAC criteria and the merits of the individual application. There is discussion, a lot of questions to the readers, and then the application is given a rating through group consensus. This is a laborious effort that requires three days and a lot of concentration and work. The Screening Committee discussion forms the basis of the staff prepared evaluation. Southlake's 1997 evaluation accurately relayed the content of the Screening Committee discussion. As I stated in my letter, 1997 was a particularly difficult year for many of the applicants because so many applications were outstanding. My notes indicate that Southlake was among those that were very strong; however, did not make the last cut of Finalists. Specifically, when the evaluation said, "citizen participation could have been more explicit," the Screening Committee really did want to have more explicit information about citizen participation. The Screening Committee's are often critical of projects they+ see as "too government driven," too business driven or too citizen driven because they are looking for collaborations. 5C-40 NCL supports a balance of government, business, nonprofits, and private citizens, as stated in the criteria. The arguments you presented in your letter about the transportation system are extremely valid and, for whatever reasons, the Screening Committee did not perceive it as strongly in the application as your community did. I have reviewed all the staff and Screening Committee notes and have observed that your primary reviewers included one who has served on the Screening Committee for many years and has a thorough understanding of the criteria, and a member new in 1997 that was able to contribute a fresh perspective to the process. Everything they presented was in direct response to the written application.. I believe their presentation was balanced and positive. NCL selects the Screening Committee based on their vast knowledge of what is happening across the country in communities of all kinds. The National Civic League and the Screening Committee do not make their decisions based on J "politically correct" matters, nor does our corporate sponsor, the Allstate Insurance Company, have any influence on the outcomes of the Screening and Jury hearing process. I would be happy to connect you with other communities similar to Southlake that have received the All - America City designation. Their accounts may be of assistance. Again, I truly do appreciate your comments and am looking forward to seeing Southlake's application in 1998. You were a strong contender and I fell sure your application will be equally strong this year. Please call me if you have further questions. Sincerely, Carole R. Bloom Director All -America City Awards 5C-41 City of Soutiflake, Texas MEMORANDUM September 3, 1999 TO: Billy Campbell, City Manager FROM: Shawn Poe, Senior Civil Engineer SUBJECT: Award of bid to Everspan Building Systems, Inc. for the installation of sanitary sewer to serve Dove Acres Subdivision Action Requested: Staff requests the City Council to award the bid for the installation of sanitary sewer to serve the Dove Acres subdivision to Everspan Building Systems, Inc. of Mansfield, TX in the amount of $187,474. Background Information: Dove Acres is scheduled to have sanitary sewer installed as part the Phase III Neighborhood Sewer Program (see attached map). This project has been delayed due to the acquisition of two easements. However, these easements were recently obtained. City Council authorized staff to bid this project at the May i9, i998 City Council meeting. Financial Considerations: The FY 1997-98 CIP budget appropriated $405,000 for the engineering and construction of sanitary sewer to serve Dove Acres. The City received 9 bids for this project. The low bidder was Everspan Building Systems, Inc. of Mansfield, TX for the amount of $187,474 (see attached bid tabulation). The engineering and surveying cost is $18,000. Therefore, the total engineering, surveying, and construction cost is $205,474, which is below the budgeted $405,000. This project has been added to the attached CIP Project Cost Ledger. Citizen Input / Board Review: None Legal Review: Not applicable Alternatives: Not applicable Supporting Documents: Map exhibit Bid tabulation for Dove Acres sanitary sewer project 5D-1 City of Southlake, Texas CIP Project Cost Ledger Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends Council award the bid to Everspan Building Systems, Inc. for the installation of sanitary sewer to serve the Dove Acres subdivision in the amount of $187,474. Please place this item on the September 7, 1999 Regular City Council Agenda for City Council approval. SEP/sep Approved for Submittal to City Council: City Manager's Office m:\wd-files`memosldove acres sewer award of biddoc 5D-2 M r O 0 0 co 0 Cl) Z W W 0 a W W N Q H Z O O Cl O O O O O O O O P O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 G O O O (C) U u� P) V ro N V O O n (N N 0 0 0 V O O M M t O V N F- V � N W N (n N tD N V (o (0 ( In O N O N V� V) n N 0 m N N o) Nf fo fo O m I Ln V "t N Q fo w n df rH to to to O] C � N V Vf /o Vk IA 4�'ot It aa W O O In N O O O O O O O O O 00 O O 0 O 0 0, 0 (n 0, O O I O O >C X F- Q T..l O o z m WojC`- F V j� o (hc�r)ooC4--CO(hoc� (n M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o w W QQ Q a v0) co " I LLI 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 t- <f O V w O w O l0 V N C1 O O (A N 0 N 0 V O O G O 0 m c0 O 0 O 0 O r O) O N n r �f 7 Of to V 0 O F- N GO n V (D N n �- In to r to m 0 m W) O 06 N N N o0 O In n cam) (n M ch O V m aD p0 C O o, to MT fo to to to to b9 to 64 n V� m o(bco� U w in ^ j n Co C m 01 U C O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000000000000000 O N z W m 3 Z W H U - (V (.- 7 coO 0 (n 0 0 0 V N (V O O m m r- O O 0 O u') -C z N N N N o0Q. O O O 00 O O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 co 0 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O C O O G O m co n m N LO (D (n N V O V O 0 O 0 O 0 0 O (n n O 0 O 0 V 0) 0 co 0 a) o) O O O) of (V <t V F a) ch U) oc (A (n (n O m lA M (o O O O V U' a co n (n (n N r- .- O N (o O N 0 n # m O 69 to � NT to � m to m Z 4 et LO Ui to to to 44 (o V9 t w O O O O O O O O (0n O O O C k W (j 0~ m LO ~ U V N V N m N O W o 0 O 0 o 00 n 0 O N 0 0 00 0 00 (V Q k~ Z 7 m (O (O LID I � N ? L ¢ 0 0 I O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O Q V N '- V V V (n O 0 O (n N r 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 0 0 0.00 m O O O V n O 0 Iq n o V r n Or(h(n m(n O O N O n00 UI V O a N O Ln 7 t- m (� (") m Q tI°1 (�I Nf 69 CDN tR Vf Vf /A 69 M Nf Mi fo fo m to m Co to (n (ti eo U en in Q I c coo �v U n Z3 O ro m ' m W m O coo o 0 0 900 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o U)0 rr o 0 0 O o m (� D1 N CO N (n non O (n 0 0 0 N 0 O- 0 0 N ' m¢ Z� (n O N 00 W=¢ a N V O o ll ¢ Wco Y Q V 'T (o co co (V In � O(V co O� N ol F- a) a Cli J 4 C7 co N ~ aalLLLQ W QQLL Q LL U-0w LL J J J J Wzz > W W J W J J J Z J 0 � a 0 in a Cl) w z O qU) ¢ vi W z N (n F- r Q - m F Q z F- J 2 W ui ~ O Q p LU a 0 ml Z m o � co (° z z(n !t a auW 0 zOwUQ Ur w W❑(a a ❑ UooaW ❑❑ OWLU QQO 0m w(n Lu UU Z0zo0 w ~D cn ❑ o b2: w Y U) ~ O� i w > w m a' > N w U w a w w U U Of F- LL 1 0 F W W n f- ioaoo0>0 F- - J W U w <>'aQ O Z 0 Q i> zNm ' oioFoof >aZZWz0 p� m(n = U 0 Q ZZZm¢F-UWiw��W Q00J wZ H- vaio Q 12 LU � W Oddd°O(nw(U)U) �x U)�(nw W UtiJ=Z❑ UQ F Z= od c7 maaav~i�(~i��O�UUO°o WZ LLB Z Q 2 F ❑ V) wU)NZ�ZOz�OZwO(ii �� i m O V O Q, mooc000UcU(nJaaOF- _ _ O O=OwaOa'aa wa JZ Qu_ Q 2 m � a ~ Z 5D-4 ZM W 0 U) Z w LU 0 w a w w U) } Q H Z Cl) o (Dovoolooco00000 0 0 0 (T7 no C 0 C G O O l o 90 0 0 (n l O �? (D h (o O Ln I (- w n N N 0 (- 0 0 0 O (n (D 0 N O) M 0 0 0 0 (n 0 O 0 O 0 w (D I o O w (D n (O V O Cl! (D O (n V In V act O rl cl (l -2 1(O N V In c: n M V W 0N V O 01 N ^ � !A V '- N 64 (A N IA W fA fR (R C4 N M !*4 N � M C ^ N N fA (R N IR LL U - K 0 y.� yrnrn N CO to (� M 0 C 0 O G 0� 0 O 0 O O [O (- O O O O In n O O O O O W m N z 3�Yox� �v eo rirn N (V n�c0(n(ncoo � (n (D O- (D O nrioo N 00 v F— LLJ , (o2Q� �� a rN DLO � t eo0 vo W O 2 O 0000000 O O O Q O O O 0 o 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 (DO o O CD O N to M (n 'IT0 a0 IT 7 (D (- O m n N 0 M 0 O 0 0 00 0000 (D co O O b N (O (� N }- (n '- o n to N 0 � CD M( O V Cl M N (V (D � (D 64 (D (D V (n O O N W (n n t-- h N"i In O /A (D O b4 V4 6" �- (A Vi fA bA `A V N fR (D N '- N (� fA fA m h N '¢ w O O o O 0 O 0 O 0 0 o 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O y z W)` m j� F 2 w M M (n M W M N �- O (- mO V V M O 0 (4 (n V o o (D O M N 0 cc IT 0 M D a (n o j 47Y�(QLQ 0 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 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (D ^ N (V m V m u? V M O O O o 0 m 0 O 0 O O N N O O w O 0 00 0 (D N O O (D N O O (-- F- '- ('? N N o In O M 0 M 0 O (.- 0 t� (j W (n (D I n (n M N V r, N M V O c) (n co (`7 (") N ° b9 0 '- W b4 to N (A 64 64 '- N !A N 14 fA N N I k O) C) 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0W00 Wm ~ („) (D lo M t17 0 0 (n 0 0 (n (n — 0 0O=QjaM Q) O Q) M (O V co N V00 O O F W m W lL Q L (D 00 N O O 0 0 0 0 O O 0 W O O (D 0 O (D an I—' O) Q ; O V N O) M V V W O O O Cl) in M CO O V N V (n 0- o 0 M 0 O) 0 0� D) '� 00 O. J (' � N r (D N (O Q) N QI N O (n (n 1- W (D o h (n N CI, (n f- N (n (n M (n U. N v4 e- O c7 il- b4 N U ^ ^ N (D t(4 Hi 1� b4 V4 fA IA fq fA (R fA 64 '- V H o k �' Q "<^ rn _ M N O O O (D O O O O to O O 0 0 O 0 MM X� X G7 O> W w n N W o" (O (D CO (n m 0 0 0 yJ m O m U Z o M 0 M m M O M to m M U7 O 0 r CD 0 0 m 0 0 O o to coD O O M O a o i wav�ia(�i¢ Z 00 mmM MMC u7 r-ON� J ~ Q �,7 M(nN llo M (O N a F- Z ll LL w Il Q Q w LL Q (L lL (n W F l.L D J J J J W> W W J W J J J Z J m 0) W 4 N Y r m 0 ~ Z Z o ZZ LLJ O < O W _QF �s 2 Q > m Z x 2 Q m ~ z 0 w �� a_ F=HaL=Q a- aw(nF- -- g > O o O W W �c7a� a N '= W w J to W = z W� V W0 U W ON Q Q ; F- W o rn O U c� z U iD W 0 (n Q (noo w�_C(J - W r N ~ O v°i rw� (D w ~ W a W W JU � o 1-w y (DEO 00>C) �r0a Z(nm ' 0(Daox=¢ W>azzwZ3 a0 mw ZZZm<W- O W u.0 f- i U (anpOa' Q 2 X LO N X U) W Q U J wZ F- aT Q M 111 w w �dCLa- W U) WUW=zLLJ � 2= w O m4 aaF-OF F-w>C)w( W� 3: F- -) �nnnzozoz�ozwomw' F� U O CO o a mao!7! zo O v'vU(AJ�aUF 0 2 0 w w 0 a m wa a Qw 0 0 m -) W° iL a F- Z 5D-5 V/ Z w W O w a W W a H Z Q 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 O 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 o 0 0 0 R 0 O 0 o 0 tR 66000000000000 N60t", N N 61l NNN NNN o) N� o 64 0 N F O U LL m m U 0 N M z m ~U I O k j W ati¢ a W o O 00000000000000 809 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 O 0 O N O v i O O N O N O N O N O N O N O N O N O M o N 0 N o eH o ff f O V f O 60 0 N h fR O oU N Q m N LU a mCO2 m` O k j w CZL a O CD 0 0 o 0 CDO 0 0 o 0 O 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 o 0 0 0 0 o O o O O o O O o O O o o o o 0 N 0 fR O N V+ V) tR to 6,i 5, Vi V. Ni 60 NN 64 fR N IH � O h i2Q�w m �U ' a ��0a. 0 H o o 0 O 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 o Q 0 0Q�m00�00Ln00c0 Cl) .-) � `) J f� 1p CO F 0 V N Oct In oc N N V V In In N M 64 C V O N N N N n Cl) O 00 O O ItN 10 N OCT (n � ❑ e- 's f O N vi N N ; N 64 vli 64 N 64; N co NN N 0m f VN (ti h 1 0 m O U V N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O M W O m W F 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N Z m o00 0 O x U a O O O O O M O O O O o O I� O O O C O N O— O 0 0 .L; m toC Q a0 0 Z 'TO'('0"a0 c O 1� m a1a0 '-I'CO4 �- rO - .-- .- )AO O N c0 C O O O In �F N M co(7 T, I a. (7 N F- Z w Il lL LL Q LL ¢ Q LL Q lL lL to LLf LL z J J J J W> w w J w J J J Z J ❑_ w ¢ ❑ m Q Cl) N ZO Z > Q m p F U) O J W W W O w ❑ ¢O D O W~ F Z Q > m Z 2 ¢ p m U i O �'LIJ O O = w ~ z O U E d d Wa O >N O OY O a l OQ❑❑ 0 zii m zzw W YN❑ow V fpp CC WWw(paw 02 w U CEO0 w 0Lu w ~ i060 o❑U 0❑U Q > OZ 4 C � W Q I > CO Oc0 Z,,d'2Q d'> UJ aZZW Z> 7Q mfn NO it ¢ ZZZmQP fp w �fn W QUO Q i w w ❑ W a. W 4. W= d CO �XN(no6 W fn W U HNZC W Hoff Z- 2 J F w 0 W ~ ¢ mdan.r- N Hf- N >w�0- 2 O 0 W Z w nNrnU<fn�UO�UZtnO° Z Z O n0❑OxOwrrOrrw Z- Z O Z 2 O w O w F O m ❑ U O O m ¢�`� m 00 00 00 U V U Uf J X d U H w X 0- J2 ¢ tL � a � W O F- Z CIP PROJECT COSTS Im A B C D 1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION BUDGETED AMOUNT BID / FINAL COST DIFFERENCE 2 1.5 MGD MIRON ELEVATED TOWER * S1,860,000 $1,832,000 $28,000 3 20" WATERLINE ALONG FM 1709 S641,000 $638,408 S2,592 4 24" WATER LINE ALONG N. WHITE CHAPEL $850,000 $826,455 S23,545 5 BRUMLOW _ S112,700 S111,000 $1,700 6 BURNEY LN. - REHAB CUL-DE-SAC S57,000 $64,523 (S7,523) 7 BYRON NELSON STOP LIGHT S40,000 $65,000 (S25,000) 8 BYRON NELSON STRIPING $65,000 $74,163 ($9,163) 9 COMMERCE TRAFFIC LIGHT* $100,000 S48,405 S51,595 10 DIAMOND CIRCLE STREETS & SEWER $1,286,000 $990,161 $295,839 11 DOVE ACRES SEWER * S405,000 $205,474 S199,526 12 DOVE FORCE MAIN* $1,747,500 $2,080,318 ($332,818) 13 DOVE/HIGHLAND PAVING* $611,480 S778,533' ($167,053) 14 DOVE/SH 114 WATER LINE RELOCATION S339,200 S280,4241 S58,776 15 FLORENCE TOWER TANK PAINTING $105,000 S152,200 (S47,200) 16 FM 1709 TRAFFIC SEQUENCING * $120,000 S42,000 $79,000 17 HILLWOOD SEWER* S95,000 $82,415, S12,586 18 HUNTWICK ESTATES SEWER S200,000 $276,1231 (S76,123) 19 JELLICO SEWER * $500,000 S419,723 S80,277 20 KIRK V, uOD WATER LINE $326,0001 $266,159 S59,841 21 LAKE DRIVE WATER, SEWER, PAVING * $364,500 S376,991 (S12,491) 22 LILAC LN. WATER, SEWER, STREET * S234,600 S286,782 ($52,182) 23 MISSION HILL SEWER S430,000 S489,099 (S59,099) 24 N. WHITE CHAPEL - COUNTY LINE TO LAKE * $340,000 S470,970 i (S130,970) 25 N. WHITE CHAPEL - DOVE TO COUNTY LINE * $181,850 $177,010 S4,840 26 N-3 & N4 LIFT STATIONS* $1,000,000 S1,009,500 (S9,500) 27 PEARSON GROUND STORAGE TANK NO. 2 * $1,687,400 S1,545,247 $142,153 28 PINE SEWER* $200,000 $183,368 $16,632 29 PLANTATION SEWER $110,400 $94,676 S25,724 30 PUBLIC WORKS CENTER IMPROVEMENTS* S405,600 S472,580 (S66,980) 31 PUMP STATION NO. 2 * $3,110,000 $3,146,800 (S36,800) 32 RAINfREE / SHADY LN WATER, SEWER PAVING S1,925,995 $1,615,029 S310,966 33 RIDGECREST * S355,576 S400,504 (S44,928) 34 SABRE SEWER CONNECTION - SOLANA $25,000 S21,700 S3,300 35 SHADY OAKS TRAFFIC LIGHT * $100,000 $91,000 1 $9,000 36 SOUTHLAKE / KELLER PUMP STATION MOD. $300,000 $294,000 S6,000 37 TIMARRON - BENT CREEK REPAIR * S726,986 $699,315 S27,671 38 TROPHY CLUB 24" WATER LINE * S1,511,000 S1,440,693 S70,307 39 W. CONTINENTAL RECON. - PHASE 1 * $640,424 $640,096 $328 40 W. DOVE RECON.-PEYTONVILLE TO SHADY OAKS S259,680 $298,3971 (S38,717) 41 WATER & SEWER TO MIRON ADDITION $196,781 $262,535 (S65,754) 42 TOTAL S23,566,6721 $23,239,774 43 TOTAL (OVER)/UNDER BUDGET S326,898 44 45 *Project not yet complete. Cost shown reflects contract bid price & engineering, surveying costs 46 47 48 5D-7 9/1 /99 City of Southlake, Texas MEMORANDUM � September 3. 1999 To: Billy Campbell, City Manager From: Charlie Thomas, City Engineer Subject: Authorize the Mayor to execute a professional service agreement with J.E. Levitt Engineering, Inc. for the design and construction plans preparation for the Countryside Court sewer and lift station Action Requested: Authorize the Mayor to execute a professional services agreement for design and construction plans preparation for Countryside Court sewer and lift station. Background Information: For the past few weeks the City staff has been meeting with property owners along Countryside Court off North White Chapel Boulevard regarding the construction of a lift station and force mains along North White Chapel Boulevard to serve the property owned by Countryside Bible Church, Barton House, Christian Men's Network and Wayne Lee. The project was initiated as staff was searching for alternatives to development in that area utilizing septic systems. An agreement has been worked out with the property owners mentioned above to accomplish the installation of the lift station, force main and gravity mains. The estimated cost of the engineering and construction is $169,000. The property owners have agreed to participate in the following percentages based upon need: Uncommon Care (Barton House) 29.6% $50,000 Countryside Bible Church 20.7% $35,000 Christian Men's Network 20.7% $35,000 Wayne Lee 14.8% $25,000 City of Southlake 14.2% $24,000 5E-1 The City participation of $24,000 is equal to thirty percent (30%) of $80,000, which is the estimated cost of the lift station and force mains and 14.2 % of the total construction cost including engineering. The City will serve as the escrow agent and contract for the engineering, but the property owners will contract with a contractor for the construction. On August 3, 1999, the City Council approved this agreement and all four property owners have executed the agreement. Part of the agreement is for the City to contract with an engineer for the design and construction plans preparation. J.E. Levitt Engineers, Inc. has performed numerous design and study projects on the sewer system in this area of the City and is very familiar with the topography and the City's sewer system in the area. The City staff has received a proposal from J.E. Levitt Engineers, Inc. for this engineering design and construe -tie*- plans preparation for a lift station and force main along Whites Chapel Boulevard and gravity mains along Countryside Court for a fee of $17,650. Nftal Financial Considerations: The City's participation in the cost of the proposed lift station, force main and gravity main including the cost of engineering is $24,000. Funds will come from the sewer fund. Citizen Input/ Board Review: All affected property owners have signed the participation agreement. Legal Review: None. Alternatives: Approve professional services agreement, deny professional services agreement, or modify it. Supporting Documents: Professional Services Agreement Map Exhibit 5E-2 Staff Recommendation: Place professional services agreement on the September 7, 1999 City Council agenda for Council to review and approve. & V�� Charl4Tho City Engineer Approved for Submittal to City Council: i City Manager's Office L 5E-3 AGREEMENT FOR THE PROVISION OF SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENTS STATE OF TEXAS: COUNTY OF TARRANT.- THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into by and between the City of Southlake, Texas, a home rule municipal corporation, located in Tarrant County and Denton County (hereinafter referred to as "City") and the Countryside Bible Church and assigns (hereinafter referred to as "Church"), Uncommon Care d.b.a. Barton House and assigns (hereinafter referred to as "Barton House"),- Christian Men's Network and assigns (hereinafter referred to as "CMN") and Wayne Lee and assigns (hereinafter referred to as "Lee") and hereinafter collectively referred to as "Property Owners", WHEREAS, public sanitary sewer service does not presently exist in the area of Countryi(ju Court; and WHEREAS, the Church, Barton House, CMN, and Lee desire to have access to the public sanitary sewer system and eliminate the need for septic systems; and WHEREAS, the o��ly via�l� alternative is 'o construct a sanitary sewer lift station and force main to access the public sanitary sewer system; and WHEREAS, the City recognizes the need for public sanitary sewer service in the area of Countryside Court; an,± WHEREAS, the City desires to participate with the property owners in the cost of the lift station and force main; NOW, THEREFORE, for the mutual consideration herein stated, the City and the Property Owners agree as follows: 1. The City will contract with John Levitt, an engineering consultant, for the design and preparation of construction plans and specifications for the construction of a lift station and force main and gravity main to serve the Property Owners' property in the area of Countryside Court as shown in Exhibit "A". The City and Property Owners will review and approve design and construction plans prior to the Property Owners negotiating a contract with a qualified contractor. 5E-4 0 2. Prior to awarding the contract by the Property Owners, the Property Owners and the City will escrow to the City (acting as escrow agent) their share of the cost of sanitary sewer improvements based upon the following percentages: Church 20.7% Barton House 29.6% CMN 20.7% Lee 14.8% City 14.2% These percentages are based upon a preliminary engineer's estimate of probable costs (including the engineering fee) of S169,000. Should the construction cost (including the engineering fee) exceed S169,000 by more than 10%, the Property Owners and the City may re-evaluate their participation in this project. After the funds have been escrowed, the Property Owners will enter into a contract with the qualified contractor. 6 The City will inspect the construction to ensure compliance with City specifications. The City will make monthly dispersals to the contractor at the request of Property Owners and contractor. 51 The City will waive the inspection fees for this construction. The City will waive -zewer impact fees and sewer tap fees for the property along Countryside Court and Barton House served by this construction and as shown on Exhibit "A". 5. After final inspection and acceptance of the construction of sanitary sewer improvements, final costs will be determined for the Property Owners and the City based upon the agreed to percentages and the final construction cost. Q Lee will approve of and dedicate the necessary easement for the site of the lift station adjacent to the right-of-way of North White Chapel Boulevard. 5E-5 0 7. This Agreement and any of its terms and provisions, as well as the rights and duties of the parties hereto, shall be governed by the laws of the State of Texas. Should a dispute arise among any of the parties to this Agreement, the parties agree that the dispute will be submitted for mediation before any of the parties pursue any other legal remedy. In the event that any cause of action is filed by any of the parties arising out of the terms of this Agreement, venue for said lawsuit shall be in Tarrant County, Texas. In the event that any portion of this Agreement shall be found to be contrary to law, it is the intent of the parties hereto that the remaining portions shall remain valid and in full force and effect to the extent possible. a The undersigned officers and/or agents of the parties hereto are the properly authorized officials and have the necessary authority to execute this Agreemlent on behalf of the parties hereto, and each party hereby certifies to the others that any necessary resolution of orders extending said authority have been duly passed and are now in full force and effect. EXECUTED in multiple originals this the day of 1999. SIGNED AND EFFECTIVE on the date last set forth below. 5E-6 Signed: Countrvsi ec�$, ible Chu Printed Name: Title: `iha�y�aK, �eoca,l ice, 'o�cY Address: C . Sa'A A kc , lx 76 d s z- STATE OF COUNTY OF On Qt,t c-,s , ¢2 G before me, MVCHCLAJ -D 0C1J-T-,L�i Notary Public, personally appeared Llt e-2 -' Z-_ S. /i Y -pE2 , personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satistUctory evidence) to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he executed the same in his authorized capacity, and that by his signature on the instrument, the person, or the entity upon behalf of which the person acted, executed the instrument. TRESS my hand and official seal. Notary Public My commission expires: l (4 1 2 OZ3 5E-7 (S Pr P`'e, M=Pubfic * # of My v Siqned: Unco Ca"re (Barton House) Printed Name: ��,2 /. �ot�c� Title:. �5� /�� r✓ J` Address: /-Io/ .S STATE OF COUNTY OF On 9,9 9 b fore me, Of' �avrnc Notary P iic, personal;. appeared � +`On - personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis f satisfactory evidence) to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he executed the same in his authorized capacity, and that by his cinnn+!ire nr the inctnimont thn rprcon or the entity upon behalf of which the person acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Notk,# Public (SEAL) My commission expires: Mall S a o03 5E-8 S*1'.. Signed: Christian Mlens Network Printed Name: Title: Address: C- STATE OF COUNTY OF On efore NotaryPubli , personally appeared ' ,personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he executed the same in his authorized capacity, and that by his signature on the instrument, the person, or the entity upon behalf of which the person acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. i Notary Public 'J My commission expires: 5E-9 TAMMY D. 1�Notary Public STATE OF TEXAS Signed: Printed Name: " 10 (1 11,,u L- C Title: Address: STATE OF COUNTY OF On —� ��, (C'C�C� before me, Notary /Publ, personally appeared '' , personally known to me (or proved to me on the bans of satisfactory "'evidence) to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he executed the same in his authorized capacity, and that by his signature on the instrument, the person, or the entity upon behalf of which the person acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Notary My com expires: iDlm', � 5E-10 pP�Y PGA` TAMMY D. SMITH i * Notary Public cg P STATE OF TEXAS OF My Comm. Exp. 12/08/2002 (SEAL) CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS By: 4 ol�� Rick Stacy, Mayor ATTEST: Sandra LeGrand, City Secretary F-7 �Co x\\\\ Date: 5E-11 J. E. LEVITT ENGINEERS, INC. ENGINEERS • PLANNERS .� 726 COMMERCE • SUITE 104 • SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS 76092 • (81 7) 488-3313 August 10, 1999 v1r. Charlie Thomas, P.E. Public Works Department City of Southlake 667 N. Carroll Ave. Southlake, Texas 76092 Re: Sanitary Sewer Improvements Ravenaux Village Dear i' lr. Thomas: I have reviewed the project and offer the following ■ design survey. ■ preparation of utility easement exhibits. ■ preparation of construction plans including sanitary sewer layout, sanitary sewer plan and profile. ■ design of lift station. ■ preparation of lift station construction plans. ■ preparation of force main layout. ■ prepare construction documents. ■ submit plans to city for review. ■ assist owner in taking and review of bids. ■ prepare contract documents for execution. ■ construction staking (one time). ■ attend pre -construction meeting. ■ review shop drawings. ■ review monthly construction pay estimates. ■ prepare construction record drawings from data by contractor. ■ furnish city with Autocad R13.dxf files. 0-_ 5E-12 Page Two Ravenaux Village The surveying and engineering fees for the above work will not exceed S 17,650.00. The project will take an estimated 45 days to complete. I appreciate this opportunity and look forward to working with you. Sincerely, J.E. Levitt E*eers, Inc. Levitt, P.E. Accepted: City of Southlake 5E-13 Sanitary Sewer Project City of Southlake Geographic Information Systems 5E-14 City of Southlake, Texas MEMORANDUM September 3, 1999 TO: Billy Campbell, City Manager FROM: Garland Wilson, Director of Public Safety SUBJECT: Authorize the Mayor to enter into an interlocal agreement between the Cities of Bedford, Colleyville, Euless, Grapevine, Haltom City, Keller, North Richland Hills, Richland Hills, Trophy Club, Southlake, all of Tarrant County, and Trophy Club MUD for centralized recruiting for fire personnel. Auction Requested: City Council consideration of interlocal agreement for centralized recruiting for fire personnel. Background Information: In 1997, several entities joined an interlocal agreement to conduct a central recruiting program for fire personnel. The City of Southlake has the opportunity to join this centralized recruiting process in an effort to obtain a larger pool from which to select firefighters/paramedics. Currently, this joint recruiting effort includes Bedford, Colleyville, Euless, Grapevine, Haltom City, Keller, North Richland Hills, Richland Hills, Tarrant County, Trophy Club, and Trophy Club MUD. As part of this process, each entity agrees to develop, implement, and maintain a central recruiting program for fire personnel including an application process, written test, and an agility test. This testing process would develop one or more eligibility lists from which the City of Southlake will be able to select applicants to interview. Another goal is for the eligibility lists to include a broader range of applicants to select from, including women and minorities. The City has the right to select applicants that meet the minimum qualifications for the firefighter/paramedic positions, and can select from any order on the list. To develop and facilitate this recruiting process, a committee composed of a Fire representative, in conjunction with a Human Resources representative of each entity, was developed. Each entity shall equally fund outside expenses which are unanimously agreed on and associated with the central recruiting process, such as brochures and advertisements. 5F-1 Billy Campbell September 3, 1999 Page 2 Financial Considerations: Citizen Input/ Board Review: Legal Review: Alternatives: Supporting Documents: Staff Recommendation: GW/bls Participation in the centralized recruiting effort will decrease the City's expense in recruiting future firefighter/paramedics. The most significant reduction is the expense for advertising. Advertising cost for the last firefighter position totaled over $1100.00. Advertising cost for each year is expected to be less than $500.00 after we enter the agreement with the Northeast Agency Combined Testing. The City of Bedford conducts all processing of applications, therefore, staff s time to process and review applications is reduced. No citizen input has been received. Not subject to any board review. Debra Drayovitch conducted a review and approved the agreement. Continue with current methods of advertising in local, state and national organizations for positions in the City of Southlake. Interlocal Agreement for centralized recruiting for fire personnel. Place the interlocal agreement between the Cities of Bedford, Colleyville, Euless, Grapevine, Haltom City, Keller, North Richland Hills, Richland Hills, Trophy Club, Southlake, all of Tarrant County, and Trophy Club MUD for centralized recruiting for fire personnel on the September 7, 1999 City Council meeting agenda for approval. Approved for Submittal to City Council: � J City Manager's Office SF-2 The State of Texas: CENTRAL RECRUITING FOR FIRE County of Tarrant: PERSONNEL INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT This agreement is entered into by and between the Cities of Bedford, Collevville, Euless, Grapevine, Haltom City, Keller, North Richland Hills, Richland Hills, Southlake, all of Tarrant County, Texas, Trophy Club, and Trophy Club Municipal Utility District, of Denton County, Texas (hereinafter referred to as "Cities' pursuant to the authority granted by the Interlocal Cooperation Act, Chapter 791 Texas/Government Code. WHEREAS, there is a need for cooperation in the recruitment of fire personnel; and WHEREAS, Cities have determined that the most economical and effective method for attracting and hiring qualified personnel for fire department positions is through an agreement establishing a joint effort; and, WHEREAS, Cities desire to enter into this Agreement to provide for the recruitment, investigation and testing of applicants for fire department positions; and, WHEREAS, each party if authorized to perform the services contemplated herein; NOW, THEREFORE, WITNESSETH: In consideration of the mutual covenants and the term and conditions hereinafter set forth, Cities agree as follows: 1. Cities agree to develop, implement, and maintain a central recruiting program for fire personnel, which may include a background investigation, testing and the creation of one or more eligibility lists. 2. A committee composed of the Fire Chief to conjunction with Human Resources of each City, or their designated agent, shall oversee the joint recruiting process. The Committee shall establish minimum requirements for applicants for fire department positions, and shall agree on which City shall assume responsibility for various tasks, resources, and services such as record keeping, printing, testing facility, etc. Each City shall equally fund outside expenses, which are unanimously agreed on associated with the central recruiting process, such as brochure development and advertisement. All of such payments shall be made from current revenues available to the paying City. A recruiting brochure will be developed by the Committee. Any requirement that an individual City might have that is over and above the minimum requirements for applicants shall be specified by attachment to the recruiting brochure. Each City shall use a common form for applicants and all such applications shall be forwarded to the Committee. The Committee may unanimously promulgate such rules and regulations, including but not limited to the type of testing, both physical, and psychological, as may be desirable for the operation of the central recruiting process. Testing shall be done in a manner, SF-33 which complies with the legal requirements of Fire and Police Civic Service Law and other statutes applicable to any City covered by this Agreement. 3. While any employee of the Cities is working on tasks associated with or for the central recruiting process, such employee shall continue to be an employee of the City for which the employee works on duties that do not include the central recruiting process and shall be considered to be under the command of the Committee. 4. In performing duties under the Agreement, each party will comply with all necessary Federal, State and local laws, regulations and ordinances. 5. The party regularly employing the employee assigned central recruiting tasks shall pay all wages and disability payments, pension payments and payments for damages to equipment and clothing of that employee while he or she is involved in activities pursuant to this Agreement the same as though the services had been rendered within the jurisdiction wherein the employee is regularly employed. 6. A City that is a party to this Agreement may withdraw from this Agreement only after providing not less than thirty (30) days written notice of withdrawal to the other participating Cities. The Agreement may be amended or terminated at any time by mutual agreement of the Cities. Withdrawal by any City shall not invalidate the Agreement as far as the remaining Cities are concerned. ` 7. In the event that any person performing services pursuant to this Agreement shall be cited as a party to a State or Federal civil lawsuit arising out of the performance of those services, that person shall be entitled to the same benefits that he or she would be entitled to receive if such civil action had arisen out of the performance of his or her duties as a member of the department where he or she is regularly employed and in the jurisdiction of the party by which that person is regularly employed. 8. Each City does hereby waive all claims against and agree to release every other City, its fire department, officials, agents, officers, and employees in both their public and private capacities, from and against any and all claims, suits, demands, losses, damages, causes of action and liability of every kind, including but not limited to court costs and attorney's fees, which may arise due to any death or injury to any person, or the loss of, damage to, or loss of usage of any property, arising out of or occurring as a consequence of the performance of this Agreement whether such injuries, death, or damages are caused by the sole negligence or the joint negligence of any City, its officials, agents, officers, and employees. It is the express intention of the parties hereto that the waiver and release provided for in this paragraph includes claims arising out of such other City's own negligence, whether that negligence is a sole or a concurring cause of the injury, death or damage. 9. It is expressly understood and agreed that, in the execution of the Agreement, no City waives, nor shall be deemed hereby to waive any immunity or defense that would otherwise be available to it against claims arising in the exercise of governmental powers and functions. SF-4 10. Each City agrees that if legal action is brought under this Agreement, exclusive venue shall lie in Tarrant County, Texas and construction of its terms or provisions, as well as the rights and duties of the Cities hereunder, shall be governed by the laws of the State of Texas. 11. This Agreement may be amended or modified only by the mutual written agreement of the Cities. 12. This Agreement contains all commitments and agreements of the Cities, and oral commitments not contained herein shall have no force or effect to alter any term or condition of this Agreement. 13. Should all the named cities in this Agreement not duly authorize and execute this Agreement, then this Agreement shall only be in effect as to those cities who have duly authorized and executed this Agreement on first reading by their Council. Thereafter, any of the remaining named cities to this Agreement who have not duly authorized and executed this Agreement shall not be allowed to participate in this Agreement without the express written consent of all cities who have duly authorized and executed this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed multiple copies of this Agreement to be effective upon execution and dating by each City, a fully executed copy of which shall be furnished to the City Secretary of each City. The Agreement shall be effective until 12:00 P.M. June 10.2000 and thereafter such agreement shall be automatically renewed for successive two year terms unless terminated by notice to all participating Cities given at least 30 days prior to expiration of the then current term. 5F-5 APPROVED BY THE CITY OF BEDFORD, TEXAS By: cJ'e'a�'c Date: AF APPROVF,H� TO)FoW AND LEGALITY: City ............................................................................ APPROVED BY THE CITY OF CO ILLS, TEXAS By: Date: ) 2/ 1 7O D TO FORM AND LEGALITY: City A orne ............................................................................ APPROVED BY THE CITY OF EULESS), TEXAS By �, / �1•• � �- - Date: ;Attom�y D AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: Ci ............................................................................ SF-6 \` APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: 7—T—\ - , �-- � -, � = City Attorney Is ............................................................................ APPROVED BY THE CITY OF HALTOM CITY, TEXAS By: Date: qq APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: —1,4)k City Attorney APPROVED BY THE CITY OF KEL TEXAS Date: APPRP' SJYAS TCy FpfZM AND LEGALITY: ............................................................................ SF-7 APPROVED BY THE CITY OF NOR r AND HILLS, TEXAS By: Date: APPROVES JTb FORM AND LEGALITY: Cit, /Attorney ............................................................................ AND APPROVED BY THE CITY OF RICHLAND . � = LS, TEXAS r' By: . C.2 b y; Datelb : PR AS TU fi001 ,ND LEGALITY: ............................................................................ APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: City Attorney SF-8 APPROVED BY THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS c Date: APPROVED BY THE CITY OF TROPHY CLUB, TEXAS By: \� .��,1• Date: 12 fkpn-.Q 15 �i.. mwj ttomey ............................................................................ APPROVED BY THE CITY OF TROPHY CLUB MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT, TEXAS Date: APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: District Attomey SF-9 City of Southlake, Texas MEMORANDUM September 3, 1999 TO: Billy Campbell, City Manager FROM: Demos Killough, Sr. Planner CASE NO: ZA 96-153 SUBJECT: Request for a Variance to the Subdivision Ordinance No. 483-G, Section 4.01(1)2 (Plat Expiration) Extending the Validity of Case ZA96-153, Final Plat - Southlake Woods, Phase 1,11.737 Acres in the T. S. Thompson Survey Abstract No.1502 On December 5, 1996, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved Case ZA96-153, Final Plat for Southlake Woods, Phase 1.On January 6, 1998, the City Council approved a 1-year extension for this plat. On May 18, 1999, the City Council approved a 90-day extension. This plat has not yet been filed in the County Plat Records and expired on August 18, 1999. The developer Toll Brothers, Inc. is requesting a 30-day extension of the validity of the Final Plat from the date of City Council action upon this request. The reason for the delay in filing this plat is due to a re -sequencing in the construction phasing of the Southlake Woods development and a change in consultants working on the project. Because this plat has expired a variance to Section 4.01(I)2 of Subdivision Ordinance No. 483-G (shown below) will be required if the extension is to be granted. Subdivision Ordinance 483-G, Section 4.01(1)2 "All other plats: A Final Plat, Plat Revision, Amended Plat or a Plat Showing which has not been recorded in the County Plat Records within one year of the date of approval shall expire. A letter requesting the extension of this plat is attached. The location map (tract map) and a reduced copy of the plat are also attached for your convenience. DKK att: Letter from Toll Brothers, Inc. Location Map Reduction of the Final Plat N. (Community Developmentl WP-FILESIMEM0196CASES196-153PE3.doc G &' SEP-02-1999 09:3e TOLL SOUTHLAKE el7416eoe7 P.02 Iro.0 `Drotbers, Glnc Quality Homes by Design DATE: August 11, 1999 TO: City of Southlake 667 North Carroll Avenue Southlake, Texas 76092 Honorable Mayor and City Council Members: On behalf of Toll brothers, Inc., I am requesting an extension of the validity of the final plats for Southlake Woods Phase 1, Case ZA96-153 and Southlake Woods Phase 2, Case ZA97-010 for a period not to exceed 30 days following the City Council's action. We respectfully ask for your consideration and approval of this request. Sincerely, Alain Filiault, Toll Brothers, Inc. RECD SEP o 21999 New York Stock Fxchangc • Synibol TOL Texas Division 1080 S. Peytonville Avenue. Southlake. TX 76092 • (8171 329-8770 • Fax (817) 251-2197 Corporate Office: 3103 Philmont Avenue. Huntingdon Valley. PA 19006 TOTAL P.02 5G2 AIA IAIA IAIA IMA 'AIAZA C m M r IA' AOr 1IATAAIAOr 5c IA ,-, IM- I AW r— KELLER CfT LUMM41 T f i stortcr A-slq SWORD m 9cl TRACT MAP x ID I A JA IA20 HER a 0 7.3 Ac A, J-Q�. 29 Ac ADD' 144 Ac a 8 rc: jo v LhL F Ex r e I i UL f1t— 3D X 3 3O5- r 4 AI WA c OL 2 28 20 A X2 3C7A qH55 ol -- -------e 2A3 A RD 5GHO 0ON ADD 9.3 At OW. EA WES JA A-00 R.J. PADE 50MY A-1255 M4 2CT5 .DI 33 U5 TA 2AI JAI a Ac 3c 5A 5WA 3-A 30 T2AI it LE 2A4 6 Ac 32 is 5cl IC C.; ID 29 I 2 5 Ac 17.2 Ac 14-5 Ac 3 J. THOU 5A2 5.4 Ac —4 SSAPLEY IM 5 Ac 'c IA285At 2 'c 5 Ac 7 -9 AW 2A2 a 9 11 AC -jr-- c------- Im 2A 16 k: wt '1 13 AC Ac IV MUM I ;-� Alf CITY LIAII T 5A 11.27 Ac CUR % 5 !B Y SCHOOL . L 4. IRIA 25 AC 4 A 1.! 18 Ac 15 Ac — -.« -••- +. POST. Htlf ttt — INC. DALLAS. TEXAS m aY�7 B fq_ --R z g aj 7 pm- it '. 8 :{" 4q SL.i 2 tia : 3S .' Yit..�S2' 88� �`•t_ -t^ fP r. •.� � .�S Sf� {'S �_ � •{ It `.-="''8y fR �f• " ;tf c?i .f :f ��e i.;� ;=i tII: - i-=5 UI I ;6= t =s = sd = :' :.i d { _ ; x• «� _ o ,c rF^t�ri gf_ yyex - i= ?"si •ii iii - i ' O ' V i Witz CD tt i tim Tze1: LO 5Cs j • city of Southlake, Texas MEMORANDUM September 3, 1999 TO: Billy Campbell, City Manager FROM: Dennis Killough, Sr. Planner CASE NO: ZA 97-10 SUBJECT: Request for a Variance to the Subdivision Ordinance No. 483-G, Section 4.01(1)2 (Plat Expiration) Extending the Validity of Case ZA 97-10, Final Plat - Southlake Woods, Phase 2, 46.073 Acres in the T. S. Thompson Survey Abstract No. 1502 On February 20, 1997, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved Case ZA97-10, Final Plat for Southlake Woods, Phase 2. On January 6, 1998 the City Council approved a 1-year extension for this plat. On May 18, 1999, the City Council approved a 90-day extension. This plat has not yet been filed in the County Plat Records and expired on August 18, 1999. The developer Toll Brothers, Inc. is requesting a 30-day extension of the validity of the Final Plat from the date of City Council action upon this request. The reason for the delay in filing this plat is due to a re -sequencing in the construction phasing of the Southlake Woods development and a change in consultants working on the project. Because this plat has expired a variance to Section 4.01(1)2 of Subdivision Ordinance No. 483-G (shown below) will be required if the extension is to be granted. Subdivision Ordinance 483-G, Section 4.01(1)2 "All other plats: A Final Plat, Plat Revision, Amended Plat or a Plat Showing which has not been recorded in the County Plat Records within one year of the date of approval shall expire. " A letter requesting the extension of this plat is attached. The location map (tract map) and a reduced copy of the plat are also attached for your convenience. [oil", att: Letter from Toll Brothers, Inc. Location Map Reduction of the Final Plat IISLKSV40011LOCALICOMMUNITY DEVELOPMENnYVP-FILESIMEILfO197C.4SES197-01OPE3.DOC 5R1 v SEP-02-1999 09:38 TOLL SOUTHLAKE 81741680e7 P.02 Toll"Brothers, Glrlc Quality Homes by Design® DATE: August 11, 1999 TO: City of Southlake 667 North Carroll Avenue Southlake, Texas 76092 Honorable Mayor and City Council Members: On behalf of Toll brothers, Inc., I am requesting an extension of the validity of the final plats for Southlake Woods Phase I. Case ZA96-153 and Southlake Woods Phase 2, Case ZA97-010 for a period not to exceed 30 days following the City Council's action. We respectfully ask for your consideration and approval of this request_ Sincerely. ttw Alain Filiault, Toll Brothers, Inc. RECU SEP 021999 New York Stock Fa-rhangc - Symbol TOL Texas Division 1080 S. Peytonville- Avenue. Southlake. TX 76092 - (817) 329-8770 - Fax (817) 251-2197 Corporate Office: 3103 Philmont Avenue. Huntingdon Valley. PA 19006 TOTAL P.02 S H 22 4 '0 Ac 2A.3 X2A 2E NAG ZA-1 5 HOOL fzp 9-3 AC Im 'A 2r 2M4 2C;5 2n R.J. PADEN F- t 7A 'A;A ZAI AT 6 4c SA SAZA 5 4 cs c 2A 2A6 t 3A 13 mo A LE IA 2A4 30 5c1 To 6 A, 38 iJJ 2 58 Ac 12.2 Ac i+tl lit At IA zc TA4 J IG 2A2 IA 5 Ac IA29 de 6 6E THOMAS AC S Ac 6C4 11 Ac 6C 9 k L I GEI Z3 182 2A3 �..-,SFI - fiFU 6F2 6.1 AC 6F 7 36 A� 2 Ac Cl TY VUIT .-4H 2 2A :5 3A :-c 3A 11-27 Ac WROLL i3y -rrT j3A F 0 a&EWARY SCHOOL A 581A ii -4 25 Ac 0 Ac IE12 A 16.44 Ak C i i `Il 1; �mglwlllol. I 2 20 c— C-- FR QuV ED— cl: to O TRACT MAP 5fA5 ria Y I �•E,,,a�8 t = �` R g� �� i ^• ^•-•+cvaat 'r Hf]HJS 'A3-IX3n9 '.LSOd O 0 rn 1 G�2 � z o� d W rIf- u Y O� �tN�II oR�� I � zK awm� I u & I �1 t i i 7 f SVX3.L 'sy-mVQ Hm4os 'x37xoria '.Lsod 5t�s rn r i,° � eon a N e ci Iii i _ L i n i l► i"r �ii # • 3 i ra b% I r r •-t� i S #iH j gtii? r ; it I i = i • = •� -� � Orr ;3#} err. � f ' =. A t -t A i-sp 1i f�ft� "e? ►ts / F i :! _ii ii =i= r^ diij iir iiii .:: i ii} ff l ifj •}fi: `i III Irvfl F£ � . �''- �� F`f1. -} { Ji f #f IIC i ° It=s lit }..� _z j ij#' �i (F �i�i t � � ��_-�_-°•• _i==e:= rY7 "_ tQ # ..s�Fc;i' a}.:!ir-': }f!#.a*.p:i. :! _i}! :µi.F:eC f5'_'_riF ic:# }:�.; -�4s _ ;;°.Fr_• ri=.c:i -c_..zct:ic::scts �c #rrili �}#iiilift is i:=_t :_ .i ! —Ft iriji=_ i�i - _ # -ti 1,4 c "" "" • • "` _a a mvvjmei dr +Y HrlHJ5 ' 13'DIORH '.LSOd 6 H"(,o City of Southlake, Texas MEMORANDUM f September 3, 1999 TO: Billy Campbell, City Manager FROM: Ron Harper, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Authorize the Mayor to enter into a Professional Services Agreement with BBC Engineering, Inc. for testing services for Town Hall Action Requested: Authorize the Mayor to enter into a Professional Services Agreement with HBC Engineering, Inc. for testing services for Town Hall Background Information: Part of the City responsibility for the Town Hall project is to retain the testing firm for soil, concrete and structural steel testing. HBC has reviewed the plans for the Town Hall project and has determined the expected types and numbers of tests. They are proposing a fee schedule of $35,623. The fees are based upon estimated quantities of tests for each of the current phases of work. Financial Considerations: The estimated fee for this work is $35,623. Funds are available under the current TIF bond. Citizen Input/ Board Review: N/A Legal Review: N/A Alternatives: N/A Supporting Documents: HBC Proposal Staff Recommendation: m � nydation: Place this item on the City Council Agenda and authorize the Mayor to enter into / this agreement. Submittal to City Council: SSG City Manager's Office 51-1 July 29, 1999 Mr. Ron Harper, P.E. Director of Public Works City of Southlake 667 N. Carroll Avenue Southlake, Texas 76092 Re: Southlake Town Hall Southlake, Texas Dear Mr. Harper: In accordance with the request of Mr. Bruce Fields of HCBeck Ltd., please find enclosed our Exhibit "A" proposal estimate for construction materials testing and inspection services anticipated for the referenced project. Based on our understandin.- of the project, we have prepared a fee schedule and estimated budget, Exhibit "A", for construction materials testing and inspection services. The quantities used were based on some of the material quantity estimates provided by Beck, on a careful review of the available drawings and specifications, and on our best estimate of time and material quantities using our past experience from projects of similar size and scope. Because the project may be built in a more efficient manner than is typically anticipated and because we have no control over the contractor's schedule, the billing for our services would be based on actual services provided, and may vary from this estimate. Only those services requested and authorized will be provided and invoiced. This proposal may be accepted by executing both originals of the attached Agreement for Consulting Services and returning one executed copy along with this proposal to BBC. You may keep one fully executed copy for your files. This Proposal for Services and accompanying limitations shall constitute the exclusive terms and conditions and services to be performed for this project. Thank you for your consideration of BBC Engineering, Inc. (BBC) for this project. Please feel free to call if we may answer any questions or assist in any way. We look forward to working with you. Sincerely, LHBCINEERING, LNC. Lyndon J. Co E. Principal Engineer Attachments F99043 Houston Dallas Fort Worth Austin Atlanta 2313 W. Sun Houston Phw N 8901 Carpenter Freeway 2301 E Loop 820 North 3913 Todd Lane 2470 Windy Hill Road Suite 107 Suite 100 Flew..... 6 r ^ 2..0 Suite 312 Suite 300 Houston. Texas 77043 Dallas. Texas 75247 6118 Austin. Texas 7r44 Marie= Georgia 30067 (713) 7-2-0700 (214) 630-1010 51_2 (512) 442-1122) (770) 618-3055 Fax (713) 722 -0788 Fax(214) 630.7070 Fax (512) 442-1181 Fax (770) 618-3015 EXHIBIT "A" HBC ENGINEERING, INC. PROPOSED FEE SCHEDULE Client: City of Southlake Attn: Mr. Ron Harper 667 N. Carroll Avenue Southlake, Texas 76092 Project: Southlake Town Hall Southlake, Texas EARTHWORK Material sampling, hour Atterberg limits (PI), each MiD relationship (ASTM D698), each ?n-place density tests, each (min. charge 3 tests per trip; max. charge 15 per day) DRILLED P!ERS Engineering technician, hour Concrete test cylinders, each Vehicle charge, day Special trip to pickup cylinders, each CONCRETE Mix design review, each Engineering technician, hour Concrete test cylinders, each Vehicle charge, day Vehicle charge, half day Special trip to pickup cylinders, each REINFORCING STEEL Placement inspection, hour Vehicle charge, half day Date: 07-29-99 Proposal No.: F99043 Unit Rate Quantity Total Page 1 of 3 51-3 29.50 2 59.00 35.00 3 105.00 120.00 3 360.00 26.50 168 ". ,452.CC Subtotal $ 4,976.00 29.50 130 3,835.00 12.50 65 812.50 30.00 13 390.00 29.50 4 118.00 Subtotal S 5,155.50 50.00 4 200.00 29.50 157 4,631.50 12.50 268 3,350.00 30.00 10 300.00 20.00 33 660.00 29.50 30 885.00 Subtotal $ 9,826.50 32.50 114 3,705.00 20.00 27 540.00 Subtotal $ 4,245.00 EXHIBIT "A" HBC ENGINEERING, INC. PROPOSED FEE SCHEDULE Client: City of Southlake Date: 07-29-99 Attn: Mr. Ron Harper 667 N. Carroll Avenue Proposal No.: F99043 Southlake, Texas 76092 Project: Southlake Town Hall Southlake, Texas Unit Rate Quantity Total STRUCTURAL STEEL, STEEL JOISTS 8, STEEL DECKING Periodic field erection inspection, hour 37.50 80 3,000,00 Ultrasonic inspection, hour 47.50 144 6,840.00 Vehicle G~��p, d?Y 30.00, 42 1,260.00 Vehicle Charge, half day 20.00 16 320.00 Subtotal S 11,420.00 ESTIMATED TOTAL COST $ 35,623.00 Clarifications and Assumptions 1. The testing and inspection in this proposal estimate represents all the testing and inspection services to be provided on this project unless additional services are requested by the client. No other testing or inspection of any kind whatsoever is included in this proposal estimate. 2. Estimated quantities and scope shown are based on material quantities given by Beck and taken from drawings and specifications prepared by the architect. 3. We have assumed 13 working days to complete the piers WITHOUT CASING. 4. We have assumed in -place density tests at one per 100 If per ft depth of grade beam and wall backfill (minimum 3 tests per trip). 5. We have assumed a concrete test frequency of one set of 4 cylinders per 50 cy or fto per mix per day. 6. We have assumed no shop fabrication inspection of structural steel will be required. Page 2 of 3 51-4 EXHIBIT "A" HBC ENGINEERING, INC. PROPOSED FEE SCHEDULE Client: City of Southlake Attn: Mr. Ron Harper 667 N. Carroll Avenue Southlake, Texas 76092 Project: Southlake Town Hall Southlake, Texas Clarifications and Assumptions (continued) Date: 07-29-99 Proposal No.: F99043 Compensation for our services will be based upon the actual work and tests performed in accordance with the unit rates shown. The estimated costs we have indicated are approximate. ESTIMATED TOTAL COST does not include: any retests or reinspections; or any changes to the contract documents. Invoices for our services are payable within 30 days with nc retain --'- Unit prices are for local services, portal-to-portal, between 7:00 am and 5:00 pm, Monday through Saturday. Overtime will be charged at the rate of 1.25 times the normal rate. Only those services requested and authorized will be Drovided and invoiced. Five (5) copies of test reports are included for distribution as directed by the client at no additional charge. Additional copies of test reports requested and approved by the client will be charged at $0.35 per page to cover copying and mailing costs. Page 3 of 3 51-5 AGREEMENT FOR CONSULTING SERVICES ..,rs Agreement is made as of July 29, 1999 between HBC Engineering, Inc., a Texas Corporation, (hereinafter "BBC") whose mailing address is 2301 E. Loop 820 North, Fort Worth, Texas 76118, and City of Southlake (hereinafter "CLIENT") whose mailing address is 667 N. Carroll Avenue, Southlake, Texas 76092. Services to be provided are described in HBC Proposal No. F99043 and are subject to the following terms and conditions to which the parties mutually agree: ARTICLE 1 - SCOPE OF SERVICES 1.1 In consideration of the mutual covenants contained 'herein. HBC shall perform the services identified in our proposal (hereinafter "the Services"), which is made a pan hereof, in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. 1.2 The services covered by this Agreement will be undertaken by HBC only upon receipt of an executed copy, signed by an authorized representative of CLIENT. 1.3 Services under this Agreement are for the CLIENT's sole benefit and exclusive use with no third party beneficiaries.intended. ARTICLE 2 - AMENDMENTS 2.1 CLIENT. without invalidatinz this Agreement, may request changes within the general scope of the Services required by this Agreement by altering or adding to the Services to be performed and any such changes in the Services shall be performed subject to this Agreement Upon receiving the CLIENTS request HBC shalt return to CLIENT a change setting forth an adjustment to the Services and Project Cost estimated by HBC to represent the value of the requested changes. Following CLIENTS review of HBC's change proposal, CLIENT shall provide written acceptance under the terms of this Agreement. ARTICLE 3 - PROJECT COSTS and PAYMENT 3.1 HBC shall be paid as outlined in our proposal. - - 3.2 HBC will submit an Invoice to CLIENT on a monthly basis or upon completion of the Services unless otherwise specified by CLIENT in writing. 3.3 Payment shall be made by CLIENT within 30 days after receipt of the Invoice. 3.4 CLIENT shall provide written notification to HBC within 15 days of receipt of the invoice should CLIENT object to all or part of charges appearing on the Invoice. The portion of the Invoice which is not in dispute shall be paid by the CLIENTS within 30 days of receipt of the Invoice. A finance charge of 1.5% per month will be paid by the CLIENT for all non -disputed invoices after 30 days. ARTICLE 4 - CONFIDENTIALITY 4.1 HBC shall maintain as confidential and not disclose to others without CLIENTS prior written consent, all information obtained from CLIENT, not otherwise previously known to HBC in the public domain. The provisions of this Article shall not apply to information in whatever form which (i) is published or comes into the public domain through no fault of HBC. (ii) is furnished by or obtained from a third parry who is under no obligation to keep the information confidential, or (iii) is required to be disclosed by law on order of a court, administrative agency or other authority with proper jurisdiction. HBC will notify CLIENT in writing immediately if information is requested under item (iii) above. ARTICLES - CONSLLTANT'S REPRESENTATIONS, WARRANTIES, and COVENANTS 5.1 HBC, its employees, agents and subcontractors will hold necessary licenses and certificates required by federal, state, or local rules and regulations. 5.2 The Services will be performed using that degree of care and skill customarily provided by an experienced professional organization providing similar services in the area during the same time period. 5.3 HBC makes no other warranties either expressed or implied, as to the Services performed hereunder. 5.4 HBC shall take reasonable precautions to prevent injury or loss to persons or property at the site. ARTICLE 6 - CLIENT'S REPRESENTATIONS, WARRANTIES, and COVENANTS 6.1 CLIENT agrees to provide HBC with all existing data, plans, and other information in CLIENTS possession which are necessary for the performance of the Services. CLIENT agrees to provide HBC continuing related information as it becomes available to CLIENT. This information will include such information as location of utilities, known site hazards, nature and/or characteristics of any hazardous or toxic materials on or near the site. HBC may rely upon this information but is not responsible for its accuracy. 6.2 CLIENT shall ensure that HBC has authorized access to the site during performance of the Services and if the time of that access is limited, CLIENT will notify HBC prior to commencement of the Services so adjustments in Project Costs and planning can be made, if necessary. ARTICLE 7 - INDEMNITY 7.1 HBC shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless CLIENT from and against any and all lawsuits, claims, liabilities, causes of action, losses, damages, forfeitures, penalties, fines, costs and expenses, including, but not limited to, reasonable attorney's fees and expenses, by whomever asserted, including, but not limited to, any government agency or branch or any third party to the extent the same arise from (i) a breach by HBC of any term or provision of this Agreement, (ii) violation by HBC of federal. Mate or local statute, rule, regulation or ordinance in the performance of the Services, or (iii) negligent errors or omissions of HBC or its employees, agents, or rbcontractors in the performance of the Services. 51-6 CLIENT shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless HBC from and against any and all lawsuits, claims, liabilities, actions, causes of action, demands, losses, damages, tor,eitures. penalties, fines, costs and expenses, including, but not limited to, reasonable attorney's fees and expenses, by whomever asserted, including, but not limited to, any government entity, agency or branch, any third party, an employee, contractor employed or retained by HBC, any third party or employee employed or retained by HBC, to the ,nt that such claim, property damage, injury or death resulted from (i) the negligence or willful misconduct of CLIENT or agent of CLIENT, (ii) violation of fedemL state or statute, rule, regulation or ordinance by CLIENT or agent of CLIENT, (iii) CLIENTS alleged involvement or status as an owner. operator, arranger, generator or transporter Lardous substances or constituents at the site, or (iv) inaccurate information provided by CLIENT to HBC. ARTICLE 8 - LIMITATION OF LIABILITY 8.1 With respect to the Services performed by HBC, its employees, agents, affiliates and subcontractors, damage, costs, expenses, or other liability, direct or indirect, shall be limited to $50,000 or the Project Cost under Article 3, whichever is less. In no case shall HBC be liable for punitive, special, incidental, exemplary or consequential damages. ARTICLE 9 - INSURANCE 9.1 HBC represents that it now carries and will continue during the terms of this Ageement to carry Workmen's Compensation. Comprehensive General Liability and Comprehensive Automobile Liability insurance in the following amounts: • Statutory workers Compensation Insurance and Employers Liability Insurance - 51.000.000 per accident. • Commercial General Liability Insurance - $ 1,000,000 per occurrence and S 1.000,000 annual a_egrea to for bodily injury or death and property damage, including loss of use thereof. written on an occurrence (as opposed to a "claims made') basis. Umbrella Liability Insurance - 55,000,000 per occurrence and S5,000.000 aggregate liability for bodily injury or death and property damage, including loss of use thereof. Comprehensive automobile Liability Insurance covering all owned, non -owned and hired vehicles - S I,000,000 combined single limit of liability per occurrence for bodily injury or death and property damage, including loss of use thereof, written on an occurrence (as opposed to a "claims made") basis. • Errors and Omissions Insurance, including Pollution Liability, Applicable to Services - S2,000,000 with respect to claims made against HBC for negligent errors or omissions in the performance of the Services hereunder. ARTICLE 10 - DELAYS AND TERMINATION 10.1 CLIENT or HBC may terminate this Agreement upon forty-eight (48) hours written notice should the other part fail substantially to oerform in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement through no fault of the terminating parry. A complete settlement of all claims upon such termination of this Agreement shall be made as follows: CLIENT shall compensate HBC for the Services performed up to the date of receipt of termination plus reasonable costs incurred in terminating the Services in accordance with HBC's current fee schedule. In the event Services cannot be performed on or before the projected due date because of circumstances bevond the control of HBC, including, but not limited to strike, fire, riot, excessive precipitation, act of God, governmental action, third party action or action of omission by CLIENT, the Services shall be amended by CLIENT and HBC in accordance with Article'_ of this Agreement. ARTICLE 11 - WASTE AND SAMPLE DISPOSITION 11.1 Unless otherwise specified in Proposal, the proper disposition of any contaminated materials generated on -site as a result of the Services, including, but not limited to, waste materials, samples, produced soils or fluids, or protective equipment (hereinafter "Affected Materials"), shall be considered out -of -scope and shall require a written change order request by CLIENT in accordance with Article 2 of this Agreement wherein CLIENT provides a generator number, specifies its choice of transporter and treatment, storage or disposal facility and completes documentation necessitated by these services. CLIENT understands that HBC is in no way responsible for the proper disposition of the Affected Materials except as provided under this Agreement and CLIENT is responsible for directing the disposition of the Affected Materials. In the event that test samples obtained during the Services contain substances hazardous to health, safety or the environment, or equipment used during the Services cannot be reasonably decontaminated. CLIENT shall, if necessary, sign documentation required to ensure that this equipment and/or samples are transported and disposed of properly. CLIENT agrees to pay HBC the fair market value of this equipment and reasonable disposal costs. 1 1 ' In the event CLIENT wishes for HBC to retain test samples beyond the final report date for the Services. CLIENT shall provide HBC with a written request stating the same. HBC shall invoice CLIENT only for those storage charges incurred for storage beyond thirty (30) days after the report date for the Services. ARTICLE 12 - ENTIRE AGREEMENT 12.1 This Agreement (including attached schedules) constitutes the sole and entire agreement between HBC and the CLIENT. This agreement replaces and supersedes all prior discussions and agreements between the CLIENT and HBC with respect to the matters contained herein. By executing this agreement, HBC and CLIENT indicate their acceptance and agreement with its terms. Client: City of Southlake HBC En 'neering, Inc. By: By: Name: Name: Lvndon Am P.E. Title L,nrre 51-7 Title: Principal Engineer Date: Julv 29. 1999 i City of Southlake, Texas MEMORANDUM May 27, 1999 TO: Billy Campbell, City Manager FROM: John T. Knight, Deputy Director of Public Safety SUBJECT: Authorize the Mayor to enter into a contract with DynaSource for data imaging equipment. Action Requested: Consider authorizing staff to purchase Document imaging software and equipment from DynaSource. Background Information: At the present time the city owns one document imaging system that is broken and can not be repaired. It is housed in the Department of Public Safety. The manufacturer has gone out of business and there are no replacement parts available. No other city department has access to this equipment or use. All other departments are storing manual records in paper form, warehoused in multiple locations. The addition of this equipment will give all city staff access to document imaging capabilities. Which will result in less storage of paper forms. Financial Considerations: During the 98-99-budget process this problem was discussed. We requested and the City Council approved a budgeted amount of $50,000 for the purchase of this software and the equipment for document imaging. DynaSource Company is on the state bid list for approved high technology vendors. We have negotiated with them for a price of $29,860 for the software and hardware. Citizen Input/ Board Review: None. Legal Review: The attorneys have advised staff that a formal bid is not required since this is a technology -related expenditure. Alternatives: None. Supporting Documents: The proposed pricing and equipment from the vendor. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the proposal from DynaSource be accepted and the order be placed. 5J i Approved for Submittal to City Council: �. City Manager's Office &J a From: DynaSource, LLC To. John Knight Date: 8/30/99 Time: 11:00:14 AM Page 2 of 2 975 Intornou 10 North, B—on , 7X 77706 * (800) 217-SoI5 (409) 892-4247 + Fa (409) 892-3056 Email dcour-kAwtiroorchi—cem ♦www.xtir�vchiroacam QUOTE August 30, 1999 City of Southlake John Knight 667 North Carroll Ave. Southlake, TX 76092 John, This is the software configuration and DS work that we discussed Chuck Beard and Pete Petry (800) 217-5015 CATALOG RETAIL QISV NUMBER DESCRIPTION QTY PRICE PRICE 208612401 LF NT Workgroup - 5 user 3 11,835.00 9,960.00 (1 scanning station + 4 retrieval users) 208612403 LF NT Workgroup Priority LSAP 3 3,270.00 3,105.00 920382001 Installation and Integration ($65 per hour) - Est. 10 750.00 650.00 920381901 Training ($65 per hour) - Est. 10 750.00 650.00 Per Diem (@ $120 per day per person) 4 480.00 480.00 Shipping & Handling 35.00 35.00 TOTAL $ 14,880.00 SJ3 DynaSource, LLC To: John Knight Date: 9/1/99 Time. 10:08.50 AM Page 1 of 1 975 httarrtata 10 North, B*a oot, IX 77706 ♦ (9D0) 217-5015 (409) 992-4U3 ♦ Fa: (409) W2-3056 Email dtoure*Q"tivaar<hivat.c ♦rrww ti_chi�ar._ QUOTE (4) September 1, 1999 City of Southlake John Knight 667 North Carroll Ave. Southlake, TX 76092 John, This is the scanners quote, per your request. Chuck Beard and Pete Petry (800) 217-5015 CATALOG NUMBER DESCRIPTION 204881200 RICOH IS420 204511300 SCSI Cables RETAIL QISV QTY PRICE PRICE 3 14, 985.00 14, 235.00 3 237.00 225.00 920321000 Installation & Integration ($65.00 per hour) 8 TOTAL SJ /I 600.00 520.00 $14,980.00 City of Southlake, Texas MEMORANDUM September 3, 1999 TO: Billy Campbell, City Manager FROM: Sharen Elam, Director of Finance SUBJECT: Tarrant County Tax Collection Contract Action Requested: Approval of the contract with Tarrant County for assessment and collection services for ad valorem taxes levied by the City of Southlake. Background Information: Since 1982, the Tarrant County Tax Assessor/Collector has collected property taxes for the City of Southlake. The renewal contract has been presented to the City for collection of the 1999 taxes for the fiscal year beginning October 1, 1999. Tarrant County charges $.40 per financial transaction, defined as a navment or refund on an account. This is the same per transaction fee as the previous year, and is a very reasonable charge for the service provided. Southlake would spend far in excess of the $4,000 budgeted for this service in personnel costs alone if we collected our own taxes. The working relationship with the Tarrant County tax office has been excellent, and they are responsive to our requests for information. The contract provides for disbursements to be made to the City when daily collections exceed $100, or at the close of the month. Also included in the contract is a listing of the reports provided to the City. There are provisions that allow the City to perform an audit of the County's collection process if we choose to do so. Financial Considerations: If the contract is not approved the City would have to make provisions to collect taxes for ourselves. This would cost significantly more than the cost for Tarrant County to collect the City's taxes. Citizen Input/ Board Review: There is no requirement for citizen or board review of the contract with Tarrant County for tax collection. Legal Review: The contract has been sent to the City Attorney for review. Alternatives: The City could assess and collect taxes for ourselves at a significantly higher cost than what is proposed by Tarrant County. Supporting Documents: Contract for Tax Collection with Tarrant County ©MI, I Billy Campbell, City Manager Tarrant County Contract September 3, 1999 Page 2 Staff Recommendation: Approval of the contract with Tarrant County for assessment and collection services for ad valorem taxes levied by the City of Southlake. Approved for Submittal to City Council: A/- ti anager's Office IN S K- a- JUNK G_ MSON Tax .assessor -Collector ASA P. HA:�ICK Chief Deputy June 15, 1999 Ms. Lynne Martinson Assistant Finance Director City of Southlake 1725 E Southlake Blvd Southlake TX 76092 Dear Ms. Martinson, TARRANT COUNTY FORT WORTH, TEXAS 76196-0301 Please find enclosed two original Contracts for the assessment and collection of vour ad valorem taxes by Tarrant County. Please return both signed Contracts byy Friday September 10, 1999, so that all necessary actions may be completed before October 1, 1999. I will mail a fully executed Contract to you after the Commissioners Court has made formal approval of the Contract. Please note in Section V of the Contract that your 1999-tax rate is due in my office by 2 p.m., Thursday, September 16, 1999. We ask that you schedule your budget and/or tax meetings in a manner that will allow you to set your tax rate on or before that date. Thank you for your cooperation. If you have any questions, contact George Nobles at (817) 884-1123 or call my office at (817) 884-1106. Sin ely, v Q� June Garrison Tax Assessor -Collector Tarrant County Tax Office JG:ew Enclosures 2-4 S K-.3�1 STATE OF TEXAS X X AGREEMENT COUNTY OF TARRANT X Agreement made this day of 91999, by and between June Garrison, Tarrant County Tax Assessor -Collector, and Tarrant County, hereinafter referred to as ASSESSOR/COLLECTOR, whose address is 100 E. Weatherford Street, Fort Worth, Texas 76196-0301, and the CITY of Southlake hereinafter referred to as CITY, whose address is 1725 E. Southlake Blvd., Southlake, Texas 76092. PURPOSE OF AGREEMENT The purpose of this Agreement is to state the terms and conditions under which the ASSESSOR/COLLECTOR will provide assessment and collection services of Ad Valorem taxes levied by the CITY. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises herein contained, the parties hereto agree as follows: I. SERVICES TO BE PERFORMED The ASSESSOR/COLLECTOR agrees to collect the taxes due and owing on taxable property upon which the CITY has imposed said taxes. The ASSESSOR/COLLECTOR shall PERFORM THE SAID SERVICES IN THE SAME MANNER AND FASHION AS TARRANT COUNTY COLLECTS ITS OWN TAXES due and owing on taxable property situated within its boundaries. The services performed shall include, but not be limited to: receiving information from the Tarrant Appraisal District for purposes of the Certified Appraisal Roll, and monthly changes thereto; providing mortgage companies, property owners and tax representatives, tax roll and payment data; providing all necessary assessments of taxes and Truth in Taxation calculations as required; the transmittal of tax statements via the U.S. Mail or electronic transfer of data; and rapid deposit payment processing. All CITY disbursements, made by check or by electronic transfer (wire), for collected tax accounts will be made to the CITY on the day the County Depository Bank indicates the mandatory assigned "float" period has elapsed and the funds are posted to the collected balance. If any daily collection total is less than one hundred dollars ($100.00), the disbursement will be withheld until the cumulative total of taxes collected for the CITY equals one hundred dollars ($100.00), or at the close of the month. II. REPORTS The ASSESSOR/COLLECTOR will provide the CITY the following reports, if requested: Daily: General Ledger Distribution Report Weekly: Detail Collection Report (Summary) Monthly: Tax Roll Summary (Totals Only) Month End Report Detail Collection Report (Summary) General Ledger Revenue & Expense Report Agriculture Rollback Collection Report Delinquent Tax Attorney Tape (Exhibit A) Annual: Paid Tax Roll Delinquent Tax Roll Current Tax Roll The ASSESSOR/COLLECTOR will provide additional reports as follows: Other requested reports that require programming: $ 25.00 per hour Other reports requiring computer run-time: $350.00 per hour III. COMPENSATION In consideration of the services to be performed by the ASSESSOR/COLLECTOR, compensation for the services rendered is a rate of forty cents ($.40) per financial transaction. A financial transaction occurs when a CITY account is credited with a payment or debited for a refund. Page 2 of 6 SKI-5- IV. AUDITS The ASSESSOR/COLLECTOR will provide to the CITY auditor necessary explanations of all reports and access to ASSESSOR/COLLECTOR in-house tax system computer terminals to assist the CITY auditor in verifying audit samples of the fmancial data previously provided by the ASSESSOR/COLLECTOR during the past audit period. If the CITY elects to have its auditors conduct a "computer system assurance review audit" requiring assistance from ASSESSOR/COLLECTOR system's programmers and accountants, the fee is $660.00 per day, which will be deducted from the CITY'S current collections at the end of the month. V. TAX RATE REQUIREMENT The CITY will provide the ASSESSOR/COLLECTOR, in writing, their newly adopted tax rate and exemption schedule to be applied for assessing purposes no later than 2:00 p.m., Thursday, September 16, 1999. -tinder authority of Svciion -31.01 (h) of the Property Tax Code, any additional cost of printing and mailing tax statements because of late reporting of the tax rate or the exemption schedule will be charged to and must be paid by the CITY. If the CITY wishes its collection reports to be itemized out as to maintenance and operation fund and interest and sinking fund, then the notice advising of the new tax rate must set out the separate rates, as well as the total rate. The tax rate and the exemption schedule for each of the last five (5) years in which an ad valorem tax was levied, or all prior years where there remains delinquent tax, must be furnished in writing to the ASSESSOR/COLLECTOR at the time of the initial contract. VI. COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE STATUTES, ORDINANCES, AND REGULATIONS In performing the services required under this Agreement, the ASSESSOR/COLLECTOR shall comply with all applicable federal and state statutes, case law, opinions of the Texas State Attorney General, Court orders and Comptroller regulations. If such compliance is impossible for reasons beyond its control, the ASSESSOR/COLLECTOR shall immediately notify the CITY of that fact and the reasons therefor. Page 3 of 6 VII. DEPOSIT OF FUNDS All funds collected by the ASSESSOR/COLLECTOR in the performance of the services stated herein for the CITY shall be promptly transferred to the account of the CITY at their depository bank. Electronically transferred funds incur an additional fee which will be charged back to the CITY and deducted from those collected funds. If the CITY desires its tax disbursements to be made by electronic transference of funds (wire) the ASSESSOR/COLLECTOR has no liability for the funds after initiation of the electronic transference of the CITY'S funds from the County Depository to the CITY'S designated depository. VIII. REFUNDS Refunds will be made by the ASSESSOR/COLLECTOR except as set forth herein. The ASSESSOR/COLLECTOR will advise the CITY of changes in the tax roll which were mandated by the Tarrant Appraisal District. The ASSESSORICOLLECTOR will not make refunds on prior year paid accounts unless the prior year paid accounts for the past five (5) years are provided to the ASSESSOR/COLLECTOR via computer magnetic tape in the exact computer layout as set out in Exhibit "B". All refunds of overpayments or erroneous payments due, but not requested, and as described in Section 31.11 of the Texas Property Tax Code, will after three years from the date of payment, be proportionately disbursed to those entities contracting with the ASSESSOR/COLLECTOR. The contract must have been in force, actual assessment and collection functions begun and the tax account was at the time of the over or erroneous payment within the CITY'S jurisdiction. The proportional share is based upon the CITY'S percent of the tax account's total levy assessed at the time of receipt of the over or erroneous payment. IX. DELINQUENT COLLECTIONS The ASSESSOR/COLLECTOR will assess and collect the fifteen percent (15%) collection fee pursuant to Sections 33.07 and 33.48 of the Property Tax Code, when allowed. The ASSESSOR/COLLECTOR will disburse the amount directly to the CITY for compensation to a Firm under contract to the CITY. Page 4 of 5 If the delinquent collection Attorney contracted by the CITY requires attendance of Tax ASSESSOR/COLLECTOR personnel at a court other than the District Courts in downtown �-- Fort Worth, and the county is not a party, the employee's expenses and proportionate salary will be the responsibility of the CITY and will be added to the collection expenses and charged to the CITY. The ASSESSOR/COLLECTOR will not be responsible for the collection of prior year delinquent accounts unless all delinquent accounts information is provided to the ASSESSOR/COLLECTOR via computer magnetic tape in the exact computer layout as set out in Exhibit "B". X. TERM OF AGREEMENT This Agreement shall become effective as of the date hereinabove set out, and shall continue in effect during the 1999 tax year, unless sooner terminated by providing sixty (60) day written notice, as outlined in paragraph XI. XI. NOTICES Any notices to be given hereunder by either party to the other may be effected, in writing, either by personal delivery or by mail, registered or certified, postage prepaid with return receipt requested. Mailed notices shall be addressed to the address of the parties as they appear in the introductory paragraph of this Agreement, but each party may change this address by written notice in accordance with this paragraph. XH. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS This instrument and Exhibits "A" and "B" hereto contain the entire Agreement between the parties relating to the rights herein granted and obligations herein assumed. Any oral representations or modifications concerning this instrument shall be of no force or effect. This Agreement shall be construed under and in accordance with the laws of the State of Texas, and all obligations of the parties created hereunder are performable in Tarrant County, Texas. This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and their respective legal representatives and successors. Page 5 of 6 55K - $ In case any one or more of the provisions contained in this Agreement shall for any reason be held to be invalid, illegal, or unenforceable in any respect, such invalidity, illegality, or enforceability shall not affect any other provision hereof and this Agreement shall be construed as if such invalid, illegal, or unenforceable provisions had never been contained. This Agreement and the attachments hereto constitutes the sole and only agreement of the parties hereto and supersedes any prior understandings or written or oral agreements between the parties respecting the within subject matter. Executed on the day and year first above written, Tarrant County, Texas. BY: JUNE GARRISON TAX ASSESSOR/COLLECTOR TARRANT COUNTY FOR THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE: TITLE: FOR TARRANT COUNTY: DATE DATE BY: TOM VANDERGRIFF DATE TARRANT COUNTY JUDGE Page 6 of 6 SK-9 Lity of Jouthlake, Texas MEMORANDUM September 2, 1999 TO: Billy Campbell, City Manager FROivI: Greg Last. Director of Economic Development SUBJECT: Resolution No. 99-70, Supporting the introduction and passage of legislation which modifies the requirements for authorizing the holding of a citywide local option election to allow a city located in more than one county the ability to hold a local option election, and encouraging the Texas Municipal League to support this initiative. Action Requested: Approval of the attached resolution. Background Information: Recall that the City of Southlake, as well as approximately 104 other Texas Cities, do not have the legislative authorization to hold a local option election regarding some aspect of alcoholic sales in the city. Our issue is the inability to hold an election regarding the sale of packaged wine in our grocery stores. During the last legislative session, Southlake led a group of cities interested in changing the statutes to allow a city in more than one county the same rights as other cities. This initiative did not clear the committee hurdle. The attached resolution is the beginning of a more comprehensive approach to impacting a legislative change, gaining the support of Texas Municipal League. Steps in that process appear to be as follows: • Reguest TML approval. The deadline for submitting a resolution to TML is October 4. • Present the resolution at the resolution committee meeting November 17 in Dallas. Financial Considerations: None Citizen Input/ Board Review: None required. There has been considerable citizen support For this initiative over the years. Legal Review: The city attorney's office has reviewed this resolution. Alternatives: Modification of resolution, or disapproval. Supporting Documents: Attached Resolution No. 99-70 X--/ _ r CJ A- I Staff Recommendation: Approval of the attached resolution. Approved for Submittal to City Council: City Manager's Office 5-L ' Z. 1999 TML RESOLUTION COVER SHEET Sponsoring Entity: City of Southlake (City, TML Affiliate, and/or TML Region) Brief Background: The current provisions of the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Code in the opinion of the Texas Attorney General's Office (Opinion JM-468) do not allow a city within more than one county the ability to hold a local option election to locally determine their position with regard to alcoholic beverage sales in their community. Cities wholly within a single county do have the ability to hold such an election. The same AG opinion notes that the Texas Constitution (Article XVL section 20) requires that the legislature enact laws allowing cities to hold a local option election and that further this section is not "self -enacting' requiring the affirmative action of the legislature to ensure equitable voting rights for all municipalities. What the Resolution is Intended To Accomplish: This resolution is intended to initiate changes in the current statutes contained within the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Code. It would support the submittal and passage of legislation changing the TABC to grant a city within more than one county the same voting rights currently enjoyed by a city that is wholly contained within one county. Statewide Importance: Including Southlake, there are approximately 105 cities throughout the State of Texas that are within the jurisdictional boundaries of more than one county. The cities of Frisco, Westlake, Aransas Pass, Copperas Cove, Grand Prairie, Richardson, and Venus have already documented support of this initiative with the City of Southlake and efforts are being made to determine the level of support from the remaining cities throughout the state who are impacted and may or may not know it. Submitted By: Name: Greg Last Title: Director of Economic Development City: City of Southlake Telephone: (817) 481-5581, ext. 750 Fax: (817) 251-9051 E-Mail: glaste,ci.southlake.tx.us PLEASE DO NOT WRITE ON THE BACK OF THIS FORM RESOLUTION NO. 99-70 A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE INTRODUCTION AND PASSAGE OF LEGISLATION WHICH N/IODIFIES THE REQUIREMENTS FOR AUTHORIZING THE HOLDING OF A C'ITY�VIDE LOCAL OPTION ELECTION TO ALLOT' A CITY LOCATED IN MORE THAN ONE COUNTY THE ABILITY TO HOLD A LOCAL OPTION ELECTION, AND ENCOURAGING THE TEXAS MUNICIPAL LEAGUE TO SUPPORT THiS INITIATIVE. WHEREAS. approximately 105 cities in the State of Texas are within the jurisdictional boundaries of more than one County, and WHEREAS. the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Code governs the holding of local option elections for citizens to approve or prohibit the sale of alcoholic beverages. and. WHEREAS, the office of the Attorney General of Texas. through opinion No. RVI-468 has opined that: • The Texas Constitution. Article XVI, section 20, requires that the Legislature shall enact a law or laws whereby the qualified voters of any ...incorporated town or city may. by a majority vote of those voting, determine from time to time whether the sale of intoxicating liquors for beverage purposes shall be prohibited or legalized within the prescribed limits...: and • The aforementioned section is not self enacting: and • The COLinty Commissioners court does not have authority or power to order and direct a local option election in a city Iving partly in two counties: and WHEREAS. although the Texas Constitution mandates that the legislature shall enact laws authorizing local option elections in all cities, the current provisions of the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Code effectively prohibit the citizens of a city within more than one county from holding a local option election to determine whether to permit or prohibit the sale of alcoholic beverages: and WHEREAS, the continuance of the existing statutory provisions create inequities among Texas cities. granting greater voting rights to cities contained wholly within one county and WHEREAS. the Texas Municipal League has consistently opposed legislation that erodes the authority of municipalities to govern their own local affairs. NOW. THEREFORE. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF SOUTHLAKE. TEXAS. "I*HAT: Section 1. The City of Southlake. Texas, supports the introduction and passage of legislation that would modify the requirements for authorizing a local option election to allow a municipality in more than 09/02/99 2:18 PM J--, I! O L - '7 Page I of E 011C count% the A-)[IM to held such an elcc6011: and Section-,. The Cite Of Southlake. Texas, stron�,IN- encourages the delegates of the Texas Municipal LeaUue to concur With the findings of this resolution and approve this or a similar resolution in support of this Initiative. and to Include the introduction and passage ot�nulltiple-count\ voter enabllnu, le�,islation as a high priority in Texas Municipal Lea`,ue's 2001 le�,islative program. PASSED AND APPROVED THIS DAY OF SEPTEMBE:R 1999, CITY OF SOUTHLAKE. TEXAS Rick Stacy, Mayor ATTEST: Sandra Le,rand Cite Secretar\ APPROVED AS TO FORM: Cite Attorney \:`,Econde\ PRo)JEC'TS\LOE-2001\resolutions\TAIL-RES-02.DOC' 09./031/99 2:18 PM [City Seal] 5/-'J- Pa,e , of , City of Southlake, Texas MEMORANDUM September 3, 1999 TO: Billy Campbell, City Manager FROM: Lynn Martinson, Assistant Finance Director SUBJECT: Ordinance No. 756; 2°d reading, Approving and adopting the Annual Budget for the Fiscal Year 1999-00 and approving the revised budget figures for the Fiscal Year 1998-99. Action Requested: Approval of Ordinance No. 756, on 2' reading, Adopting and approving the Annual Budget for Fiscal Year 1999-00 and approving the revised budget figures for the Fiscal Year 1998-99. Background Information: Presented to the City Council for consideration is the FY1999-00 budget - and the revised budget For FY1998-99. This budget summarizes the plan of municipal operations for the fiscal year that begins October 1, 1999. The Council was presented a budget workbook on August 10, 1999. The summary budget information presented and attached to Ordinance 756 -flects Lhe dct i' inchlded in the budget workbook. The summary budget information also incorporates a Capital Projects Budget for FY1999-00 year, plus anticipated Capital Projects through 2004. The Capital Projects are major water, sewer, street and drainage infrastructure items that are funded through a variety of sources such as impact fees, operating fund transfers, developer fees, bonds, and certificate of obligation proceeds. Financial Considerations: The proposed budget maintains the current tax rate of $0.422 with total revenues of $32,535,306 and total expenditures of $33,661,288. Citizen Input/ Board Review: A Public Hearing was held on August 31, and a second hearing is to be held on September 7, 1999, with the 1" and 2" Reading of Ordinance No. 756, respectively. Legal Review: None required Alternatives: In the absence of approving and adopting the proposed budget for FY1999-00, per the City Charter, the amount appropriated for the current fiscal year shall be deemed adopted for the ensuing fiscal year on a month to month basis with all items in it pro -rated accordingly until such time as the Council adopts a budget for the ensuing fiscal year. Billy Campbell Ordinance No. 756 September 3, 1999 page 2 Supporting Documents: Staff Recommendation: Ordinance No. 756 Fiscal Year 1999-00 Proposed Budget and Fiscal Year 1998-99 Revised Budget summary documents and a Capital Projects Budget including anticipated Capital Projects through 2004. Approval of Ordinance No. 756, 2' reading, adopting and approving the Annual Budget for Fiscal Year 1999-00 and approving the revised budget figures for the Fiscal Year 1998-99. Approved for Submittal to City Council: +CiM—anager's Office M "EXHIBIT A" REVENUES Ad Valorem Taxes Sales Tax Franchise Fees Fines Charges for Services Permits/Fees Miscellaneous Water Sales -residential Water Sales -commercial Wastewater Sales Sanitation Sales Other Utility Charges TIF District Interest Income Total Revenues EXPENDITURES City Secretary Human Resources City Manager Support Services General Gov Total Finance Municipal Court Teen Court Finance Total Fire Police Public Safety Support Building Inspections Public Safety Total Streets/Drainage Public Works Admin Utility Billing Water Wastewater Sanitation Public Works Total Community Development Economic Development Community Dev. Total Community Services Parks and Recreation Library Services Community Svcs. Total ALL FUNDS SUMMARY 1999-00 Proposed Budget and 1998-99 Revised Budget 10 11 AM 09/03/99 1997-98 Actual 1998-99 Adopted 1998-99 Revised S Increase/ (Decrease) Adopted % Increase/ -Decrease 1999-00 Proposed S Increase/ (Decrease) Adopted % Increase/ -Decrease $6,699,540 $8.864,749 $8,864.749 $0 0.0% $9,543,252 5678,503 7.7% $4,253,109 $5,975,100 5,975,100 0 0.0% 6,961,247 986,147 16.5% 881,066 984,112 1,117,472 133,360 13.6% 1,283,296 299,184 30.4% 665,815 875,798 810,798 (65,000) -7.4% 835,798 (40,000) -4.6% 549,702 685,006 665,026 (19,980) -2.9% 657,132 (27,874) -4.1% 3,033,670 2,842,788 2.541,026 (301,762) -10.6% 2.037,565 (805.223) -28.3% 324,446 229,059 550,310 321,251 140.2% 266,354 37,295 16.3% 6,053,989 5,220,000 5,780,000 560,000 10.7% 6,358,000 1,138,000 21.8% 846,277 805,500 900,000 94,500 11.7% 990,000 184,500 22.9% 1,037,099 975,000 1,429.411 454,411 46.6% 1,572.352 597.352 61.3% 635,055 636,000 830,000 194,000 30.5% 913,000 277,000 43.6°% 409,583 443,315 458,815 15.500 3.5% 378,775 (64,540) -14.6% 0 0 90,971 90,971 100.0% 325,436 325,436 100.0% 403,592 424,832 398,850 (25,982) -6.1% 413,100 11732 -2.8% $25,792,944 $28,961,259 $30,412,528 $1,451,269 5.0% $32,535,306 $3,574,047 12.3% $226,793 $301,173 5250,451 (550,722) -16.8% $340,874 $39,701, 13.21,% $233,923 $209,600 $213,514 $3.914 1.9% $266,105 56,505 27.0% $331,624 $351,003 5452,536 $101,533 28.9% $373,692 22,689 6.5% $1 498 707 $2 526 534 $1 888 105 (638,429) -25.3% $2,682,100 155,566 6.2% $2,291,046 $3,388,310 $2,804,606 583 704 -17.2% $3,662,771 $274,461 8.1% 399,335 454,165 445,543 (8,622) -1.9% 511,040 56,875 12.5% 265,976 304,770 311,970 7,200 2.4% 360,922 56,152 18.4% 59,586 92,633 89,439 (3,194) -3.4% 76,583 (16,051) -17.3% 724,897 851,568 846.952 4( ,616) -0.5% 948,545 96,977 11.4% 1.784.462 1,857,825 1,879,349 21,524 1.2% 1,910,137 52,312 2.8% 2,822,454 3.418,246 3,086,366 (331,880) -9.7% 3,676,559 258,313 7.6% 1,004,557 1,056,436 981,736 (74,700) -7.1% 955,370 (101,066) -9.6% 567,051 692,896 696,849 3 953 0.6% 894,361 201,465 29.1% $6,178,524 $7,025,403 $6,644,300 381103 -6.4% $7,436,427 $411.024 5.9% 820,721 939,167 894,391 (44,776) -4.8% 1,074,789 135,623 14.4% 733,368 803,729 765,212 (38,517) -4.8% 937,633 133,903 16.7% 0 303,421 321,228 17,807 5.9% 269,977 (33,444) -11.0% 4,966,999 4,504,340 4,461,084 (43,256) -1.0% 5,385,229 880,889 19.6% 882,347 747,246 731,082 (16,164) -2.2% 1,044,588 297,342 39.8% 496147 560,000 560,000 0 0.0% 624,000 64,000 11.4% $7,949,683 $7,867.904 $7,732,997 124 907 -1.6% $9,336,217 $1,478,313 18.8% 489,319 531,480 485,778 (45.702) -8.6% 627,429 95,949 18.1% 116,773 144.332 167,090 22,258 15.4% 254,005 109,173 75.4% 606 091 $676,312 $662,868 2($ 3,444) -3.5% $881,434 205 122 30.3% 338,731 416,831 367,085 (49,746) -11_9% 549,868 133,037 31.9% 1.406.630 1,505,505 1,253,708 (251,797) -16.7% 1,816,205 310,700 20.6% 0 162 480 105,000 (57.480) -35.4% 162,008 4(_72) -0.3% 1,7 55,361 1 2,084,816 1 1,7 55.793 t151023 -17.2% 2,5 88,081 443.265 21.3% PAGE I "EXHIBIT A" M, EXPENDITURES, Cont. TIF District Crime Control Distnct Debt Service Total Expenditures Net Revenues Proceecs from C C. Sale/Cher Transfers In Transfers Out Total Other sources (uses) Beginning Fund Balance Reserved Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance M ALL FUNDS SUMMARY 1999-00 Proposed Budget and 1998-99 Revised Budget 10'11 AM 0SOM9 1997-98 Actual 1998-99 Adopted 1998-99 Revised S Increase/ (Decrease) Adopted % Ircrease/ -Decrease 1999-00 Proposed S Increase/ (Decrease) Adopted % Increase/ -Decrease 40,565 143,125 106,088 (37,037) -25.9% 0 (143,125) -100.0% 108,104 281,420 77,952 (203,468) -72.3% 108,703 (172,717) -61.4% 4,471,947 6,836,933 6,921.429 84,496 1.2% 8,759,111 1,922178 28.1% $24,116,118 $29,145,792 $27,512,985 ($1,632,806) -6.6% $33,661,288 $4,615,497 15.5% $1,676,826 184 533 2 899 543 $3,084,075 ($1,125,983) S718,433 $694,300 $695,154 $854 $0 ($694.300) $2,263,421 $3,161,339 $3,245,110 $33,771 $4,499,240 $1,337,901 ($2,791,403) ($3,337,735) ($3,337,735)y0 ($3,411,787) $7( 4,052) $190.451 $517,904 $602,529 $84,625 S1.087,453 $569,549 34,979,078 $6,846,354 $6,846,354 $10,348,426 $0 $0 $0 $0 $6,8 66,354 $7.1 99.725 $10.348.426 S10.309.896 PAGE 2 •EXHIBIT A" REVENUES Ad Valorem Taxes Sales Tax Franchise Fees Fines Charges for Services Permits/Fees Miscellaneous Interest Income Total Revenues EXPENDITURES City Secretary Human Resources City Manager Support Services General Gov. Total Finance Municipal Court Teen Court Finance Total Fire Police Public Safety Support Building Inspections Public Safety Total Streets/Drainage Public Works Admin Public Works Total Planning Economic Development Community Dev. Total Community Services Parks and Recreation Library Services Community Svcs. Total Total Expenditures Net Revenues Proceeds hom C.O. Sale/Lease Transfers In Transrm Out To 11 Other Sources(Uses( Beginning Fund Balance Reamed Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance Fund balance percentage-G'Y GENERAL FUND 1999-00 Proposed Budget and 1998-99 Revised Budget 10'11 MI 09/03l99 1 $ Increase/ $ Increase/ 1997-98 1998-99 1998-99 (Decrease) % Increase/ 1999-00 (Decrease) % Increase/ Actual Adopted Revised Adopted -Decrease Proposed Adopted -Decrease $3,970,964 $6,463,540 $6,463,540 $0 0 0% $6,562.798 $99,258 1.5% 2,524.770 3.026,050 3,026,050 0 0.0% 3.569,939 543,789 18.0% 881,066 984,112 1.117,472 133.360 13.6% 1,283.296 299,184 30.4% 665,815 875,798 810,798 (65.000) -7.4% 835.798 (40,000) -4.6% 549,702 685,006 665,026 (19.980) -2.9 % 657.132 (27.874) -41% 2,733,848 2.742,788 2,481.026 (261,762) -9.5% 1,937,565 (805.223) -29.4% 256.953 145,659 466,910 321.251 220.6% 182,954 37,295 25 6 % 181,469 190,000 190,000 0 0.0% 190.000 0 0.0% $11,764,588 $15,112,953 $15,220,822 $107,869 0.7% $15,219,382 $106,429 0.7% $226,793 $301,173 250,451 ($50.722) -16.8% $340,874 $39.701 13.2% 233,923 209,600 213.514 3.914 1.9 % 266,105 56.505 27.0 % 331,624 351,003 452.536 101.533 28.9% 373.692 22,689 6-5% 1,498,707 2,526.534 1,888,105 63( 8,429) -25.3% 2,682,100 155.566 6.2% $2,291.046 $3,388,310 $2,804,606 583 704 -17.2 % $3,662,771 27$4.461 8.1 399,335 454,165 445,543 (8,622) -1.9% 511.1340 56,875 12.5% 265.976 304,770 311,970 7,200 2.4% 360.922 56,152 18.4% 59.586 92,633 89,439 (3,194) -3.4% 76,583 (16.051) -173% 724 897 $851,568 $846,952 ($4,616) -0.5 % $948,545 $96,977 11.4 % 1,784,462 1,857.825 1,979.349 , 21.524 1.21�6 1,910,137 _ 52.312 2.8% 2,822,454 3,418.246 3.086,366 (331,880) -9.7% 3,676,559 258,313 7.6% 1,004,557 1,056.436 981,736 (74,700) -7.1 % 955,370 (101.066) -9.6% 567051 692,896 696,849 3953 0.6% 894,361 201,465 29.1% $6,178,524 $7,025,403 $6644,300 ($381103) -5.4% $7,436,427 $411,024 5.9% 820.721 939,167 894,391 (44,776) -4.8% 1,074,789 135,623 14.4% 783,368 803,729 765,212 3(8517) -4.80% 937,633 133.903 16.7% $1,604,090 $1,742,896 $1,659,603 83293 -4.8% $2,012,42 $269,526 15.5% 489,319 531,480 485,778 (45.702) -8.6% 627,429 95.949 18.1% 116,773 144,832 167,090 22,258 15.4% 254,005 109,173 75A% 606 091 $676,312 $652,868 23 444 -3.5 % $881, $205,122 30.3 % 338.731 416,331 367.085 (49,746) -11-9% 549,868 133.037 31.9% 1.154,334 1.454,991 1,195,678 (259.313) -17.8% 1,745.508 290,516 20.0% 0 162,480 105,000 5( 7,480) -35.4% 162,008 4{ 72) -0.3% $1,493,065 $2,034,302 $1667,763 ($366539) -18.0% $2,457,38 $423,081 20.8% $12,897,713 $15,718,792 $14,276,092 ($1,442,700) -9.2% $17,398,983 $1,680,191 10.7% ($1,133,125) 605839 $944,730 15$ 50,569 ($2,179,601) ($1,573,762) $718,433 $694.300 $695.154 $854 $0 715,869 1,235,527 1,235,527 0 785,527 $0 ($1 15s 942) ($1 15s 942) 0 ($133.697) 1434,302 $773,885 $774.739 $854 $651,830 $2,597.602 $2.898,778 $2,898,778 $4,618,248 $0 $0 $0 $0 2 8$ 93.778 $3.066,825 S446180248 $30090,476 22.48% 19.51 % 32.35 % 17.76% _�A 5 PAGE 3 "EXHIBIT A" A REVENUES Miscellaneous Interest Income Water Sales -residential Water Sales -commercial Sewer Sales Sanitation Sales Other utility charges Total Revenues EXPENSES Debt Service Utility Billing Water Wastewater Sanitation Total Expenses Net Revenues Transfers In Transfers Out Total Other Sources (Uses) Net change in wrc components Beginning fund balance Ending fund balance No. of days working capital UTILITY FUND 1999-00 Proposed Budget and 1998-99 Revised Budget 10,11 AM 1997-98 Adopted 1998-99 Adopted 1998-99 Revised $ Increase/ (Decrease) Adopted % Increase/ -Decrease 1999-00 Proposed $ Increase/ (Decrease) Adopted % Increase/ -Decrease $67,493 $83,400 $83,400 $0 0.0% $83,400 $0 0.0% 89,325 100,000 100,000 0 0.0% 100,000 0 0.0% 6,053,989 5,220,000 5,780,000 560,000 10.7% 6,358,000 1,138,000 21.8% 846,277 805,500 900,000 94,500 11.7% 990,000 184,500 22.9% 1,037,099 975,000 1,429,411 454,411 46.6% 1,572,352 597,352 61.3% 635,055 636,000 830,000 194,000 30.5% 913,000 277,000 43.6% 409,583 443,315 458,815 15,500 3.5% 378.775 (64,540) -14.6% $9,138,822 $8,263,215 $9,681,626 $1,318,411 16.0% $10,396,527 $2,132,312 26.8% 1,943,552 2,121,141 2,121,141 0 0.0% 2,120,443 (698) 0.0% 0 303,421 321.228 17,807 5.9% 269,977 (33.444) -11.0% 4,966,999 4,504,340 4.461,084 (43,256) -1.0% 5,385,229 880,889 19.6% 882,347 747,246 731,082 (16.164) -2.2% 1,044,588 297,342 39.8% 496,147 560,000 560,000 0 0.0% 624,000 64,000 11.41/o 8 289 045 $8,236,149 $8,194,635 ($41,614) -0.5% 9 444 238 $1,208,089 14.7% 849 777 $27,066 $1,387,091 $1,360,025 $951,289 $924.223 $834,145 $0 $0 $0 (715,869) 78! 5,527) 78( 5,527) (785,527) 118,2t7nn6 (785,5t2n7) (785,5c2n7) (785,5t2n7) iO i i i $1,131,261 $2,099,313 $2,099,313 $2,700.877 $2,099,313 $1,340,852 $2,700,877 2$ ,866,639 92 59 120 111 iA-� PAGE 4 `EXHIBIT A" REVENUES Ad Valorem Taxes Miscellaneous Income Interest Income Total Revenues EXPENDITURES Principal Interest Admin. Expenses Total Expenditures Net Revenues Transfers In Transfer Out Total other Sou—s/(Uses) Begmmng Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance DEBT SERVICE FUND 1999-00 Proposed Budget and 1998-99 Revised Budget 10: 11 AM C9i0df99 1997-98 Actual 1998-99 Adopted 1998-99 Revised S Increase, (Decrease) Adopted % Increase/ -Decrease 1999-00 Proposed S Increase! (Decrease) Adopted % Increase. -Decrease $2,728,576 $2,401,209 $2,401.209 $0 0.0% $2,980,454 $579,245 24.1% $0 $0 s0 s0 0.0n/ $0 s0 0.0% 67,892 35,750 35,750 0 0.0% 40,000 4 250 11.9% $2,796,468 $2,436,959 $2,436,959 $0 0.0% $3,020,454 $583,495 23.9% $1,061,750 S1,996,582 S1.996,582 s0 0.0% $2,506,754 $510,172 25.6% $809,748 S2,057,085 $2,057,085 0 0.0% $3,241,331 1,184,246 57.6% $4,604 $6,000 $6,725 725 12.1% $8,000 2 000 33.3% $1,876,102 $4,059,667 $4,060,392 $725 0.0% $5,756,085 $1,696,418 41.8% 920 366 (S1,622,708) ($1,623,433) UM ($2,735,631) ($1,112,923) 23,595 1,126,687 1,126,687 2,833,130 82( 0,128) 0 0 0 (796,533) 1,126.687 1.126,687 2,833,130 $658.932 $732,765 $782,765 $286,019 $782,765 $286,744 $286.019 $383.517 7A � PAGE 5 "EX -MIT A" REVENUES Permits/Fees Miscellaneous Interest Total Revenues EXPENDITURES Parks and Recreation Park Improvements Land Total Expenditures Net Revenues Bond proceeds Transfer to other funds Total Other Sources/(Uses) Beginning Fund Balance cnu,ng runs 6-- 31 SPECIAL REVENUE FUND Parks/Recreation 1999-00 Proposed Budget and 1998-99 Revised Budget roar AM 1997-98 Actual 1998-99 Adopted 1998-99 Revised $ Increase/ (Decrease) Adopted % Increase/ -Decrease 1999-00 Proposed $ Increase/ (Decrease) Adopted % Increase/ -Decrease $299,822 $100,000 $60,000 ($40,000) -40.0% $100,000 $0 0.0% 0 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 12,456 5 600 5 600 0 0.0% 5600 0 0.0% $312,278 $105,600 $65,600 ($40,000) -37.9% $106,600 $0 0.0% $0 $0 $0 $0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 200,082 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% $200,082 $0 $0 $0 0.0% $0 $0 0.0% $112,196 $105,600 $65,600 ($40,000) $105,600 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 53 594 ($242,141) ($242,141) 1-0 ($53,594) ($242,141) ($242,141) $0 $157,647 $216,249 $216,249 $39,708 3.2.3 7$3,; 08 3$ 9.708 $145,308 <�14 9 PAGE 6 "EXIHBIT A" REVENUES Sales Tax Interest Total Revenues EXPENDITURES Personnel Operations Capital Total Expenditures Net Revenues Transfers Out Proceeds from C.O. Sale Total Other Sources (Uses) Beginning Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance SPDC - OPERATING FUND Parks/Recreation 1999-00 Proposed Budget and 1998-99 Revised Budget 70:17 AM -,n,,— 1997-98 Actual 1998-99 Adopted 1998-99 Revised $ Increase/ (Decrease) Adopted % Increase/ -Decrease 1999-00 Proposed $ Increase/ (Decrease) Adopted % Increase/ -Decrease $1,260,821 $1,510,525 $1,510,525 $0 0.0% $1,737,104 $226,579 15.0% 31,724 37,500 37,500 0 0.0% 37,500 0 0.0% $1,292,546 $1,648,025 $1,648,026 $0 0.0% $1,774,604 $226,579 14.6% $51,314 $46,314 $54.430 $8,116 17.5% $67,098 $20,784 44.9% $900 $4.200 $3,600 (600) -14.3% $3,600 (600) -14.3% Lo L0 NO 0 0.0% N0 0 0.0% $62,214 $50,514 $68,030 $7,616 14.9% $70,698 $20,194 40.0% $1,240,331 $1,497,611 $1,489,995 ($7,516) $1,703,906 $206,395 (1,201,812) (1,154,125) (1,154,125) (1,380,583) (1,201,812) (1,154,125) (1,154,125) (1,380,583) $420,597 $459,116 $459,116 $794,986 59116 $802,502 7$ 94,986 S1 118309 —� A— 9 PAGE 7 "EXHIBIT A" REVENUES Interest Income Total Revenues EXPENDITURES Principal Interest Admin. Expenses Total Expenditures Net Revenues Proceeds from bond sale Transfers In Total Other Sources (Uses) Beginning Fund Balance Ending Fund aalance SPDC - DEBT SERVICE FUND Parks/Recreation 1999-00 Proposed Budget and 1998-99 Revised Budget 10: 11 AM 1997-98 Actual 1998-99 Adopted 1998-99 Revised S Increasei (Decrease) Adopted ° /° Increasei -Decrease 1999-00 Proposed $ Increase/ (Decrease) Adopted % / Increase/ -Decrease $18,043 2$ 0,000 $14,000 $( 6.000) -30.0% $20,000 SO 0 0% $18,043 $20,000 $14,000 ($6,000) -30.0% $20,000 $0 0.0% S205,000 $215,000 $215,000 $0 0.0% $225,000 $10,000 4.7% 446,813 439,125 522,896 83,771 19.1% 655,583 216.458 49.3% 480 2 000 2 000 0 0.01/1 2.000 0 0.0% $652,293 $656,125 $739,896 $83,771 12.8°16 $882,583 $226,458 34.5% ($634,250) ($636,125) ($725,896) ($89,771) ($862,583) $226,458 $0 SO $0 s0 $651,812 $654.125 $737,896 $880.583 $651,812 $654,125 $737,896 I $880,583 513,039 $30,601 $30.601 $42.601 $30,601 $48,601 S42.601 $60,601 PAGE 8 "EXHIBIT A" REVENUES Sales Tax Interest Total Revenues EXPENDITURES Personnel Operations Capital Pay Plan Implementation Total Expenditures Net Revenues ranshrs Out -Debt Service Proceeds from C.O. Sale Total Other Sources (Uses) Beg, g Fund Balance Enong Fund Balance 140s CRIME CONTROL DISTRICT FUND 1999-00 Proposed Budget and 1998-99 Revised Budget 1997-98 Actual 1998-99 Adopted 1998-99 Revised $ Increase/ (Decrease) Adopted % Increase/ -Decrease 1999-00 Proposed $ Increasei (Decrease) Adopted % Increase/ t -Decrease $467,518 $1,438,525 $1,438,525 $0 0.0% $1.654,304 $215.779 15.0 % 2 683 35,982 16,000 (19,982) -55.5 % 20,000 I(15,982) -44 4% $470,201 $1,474,507 $1,454,525 ($19,982) -1.4% $1,674,304 $215,779 14.6% $0 $103,050 $76,392 ($26,658) -25.9 % $107,023 $3,973 3.9% $2,464 $1,560 $1,560 0 0.0% $1,680 120 7.7% $105.640 $176,810 $o (176,810) -100.0% $0 (176.810) -100.0% $0 $0 $0 0 0 0°% LO 0 0.0% $108,104 $281,420 $77,952 ($203,468) -72.3% $108,703 ($172,717) -61.4% $362,097 $1,193,087 $1,376,573 $183,486 $1,565,601 $372,514 0 0 0 (881,050) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (881.050) $0 $362,097 $362,097 $1,738,670 $3624097 $1,555,184 $1,738,670 $2.423,221 PAGE 9 -EXHIBIT A REVENUES TIF Revenue Interest Total Revenues EXPENDITURES Personnel Operations Capital Pay Plan Implementation Total Expenditures Net Revenues Transfers Out -Debt Service Transfers In Total Other sources (Uses) Segmninq Fund 3alarca Fsdnp Fund Balance TIF OPERATING FUND 1999-00 Proposed Budget and 1998-99 Revised Budget t oa t nth nomaroo 1997-98 Actual 1998-99 Adopted 1998-99 Revised $ Increase/ (Decrease) Adopted % Increase/ -Decrease 1999-00 Proposed $ Increase/ (Decrease) Adopted % Increase/ -Decrease $0 $0 $90,971 $90,971 100.0% $325,436 $325,436 100.0% 0 0 0 0 100.0% 0 0 100.0% $0 $0 $90,971 $90,971 100.0% $325,436 $325,436 100.0% $34.719 $131,625 $100,288 ($31,337) -23.8% $0 ($131,625) -100.0% $5,846 $11,500 $5.800 (5,700) -49.6% $0 (11,500) -100.0% $0 $0 $0 0 0.0% $0 0 0.0% NO ;_0 0 0.0% N0 0 $40,565 $143,125 $106,088 ($37,037) -25.9% $0 ($143,125) -100.0% ($40,565) ($143,125) ($15,117) $128,008 $325,436 $468,561 0 0 0 0 (230,930) 38,000 145,000 145,000 0 0 38,000 145,000 145,000 0 (230,930) 5^ (Q2,565) (52,565) $127,318 2 565 ($690) $127,318 22$ 1,824 `j A ^ PAGE 10 "EXHIBIT A" Projected Revenues-FY99-00 Less: Projected Expenditures Total-Expenditures-FY99-00 C.O. Proceeds Net Transfers In (Out) Net Revenues Estimated Fund Balance/ Working Capital 9/30/99 Estimated Fund Balance/ Working Capital 9/30100 PROPOSED BUDGET 1999-00 ALL FUNDS SUMMARY Special Revenue General Utility Debt Service Parks/ TIF Operating Crime Control Fund Fund Fund Recreation Fund District Fund SPDC Funds Total $15,219,382 $10,395,527 $3,020,454 $105,600 $325,436 $1,674,304 $1,794,604 $32,535,306- $17.398,983 $9,444,238 $5.756,085 $0 $0 $108,703 $953,281 $33,661,288 $17,398,983 $9,444,238 $5,756,085 $0 $0 $108,703 $953,281 $33,661,288 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 651830 ($785,527) $2,833,130 10 ($230.930) ($881.050) ($500.000) $1,087,453 ($1,527,771) $165,762 $97,499 105 600 $94,506 $684,551 $341,323 38 530 $4,618,248 $2,700,877 $286,019 $39,708 $127,318 $1,738,670 $837,587 $10,348,426 $3,090,476 $2,866,639 $383,517 $145,308 $221,824 $2,423,221 $1,178,910 $10,309,896 PAGE 11 FUND EXPENDITURE CATEGORY Personnel Operations Capital Outlay Debt Service "EXHIBIT A" PROPOSED BUDGET 1999-00 ALL FUNDS SUMMARY EXPENDITURES BY FUND/CATEGORY 1998-99 1998-99 1999-00 $ Increase/ % Increase/ 1997-98 Adopted Revised Proposed (Decrease) -Decrease Actual Budget Budget Budget Adopted Adopted 8,774,120 10,258,129 9,756,048 12,231,777 1,973,648 9,082,924 9,576,737 8,861,483 10,470,772 894,034 1,787,130 2,473,992 1,974,025 2,199,628 (274,364) 4,471,947 6,836,933 6,921,429 8,759,111 1,922,178 GRAND TOTAL ALL FUNDS 24,116,120 29,145,792 27,512,985 33,661,288 4,515,497 19.2% 9.3% -11.1% 28.1 % 15.5% PAGE 12 NJ "EXHIBIT A" PROPOSED BUDGET 1999-00 ALL FUNDS SUMMARY EXPENDITURES BY FUND/CATEGORY 1998-99 1998-99 1999-00 $ Increase/ % Increase/ 1997-98 Adopted Revised Proposed (Decrease) -Decrease FUND Actual Budget Budget Budget Adopted Adopted General Fund Personnel 7,772,776 8,944,098 8,507,013 10,780,558 1,836,460 20.5% Operations 4,253,465 5,059,482 4,384,554 5,287,497 228,014 4.5% Capital Outlay 871,473 1,715,212 1,384,525 1,330,928 (384,284) -22.4% Total 12,897, 715 15, 718,792 14,276,092 17,398,983 1,680,191 10.7% Utility Fund Personnel 915,310 1,033,043 1,017,925 1,277,100 244,057 23.6% Operations 4,820,248 4,499,995 4,465,969 5,177,995 678,000 15.1% Capital Outlay 609,935 581,970 589,500 868,700 286,730 49.3% Debt Service 1,943,552 2,121,141 2,121,141 2,120,443 (698) 0.0% Total 8,289,045 8,236,149 8,194,535 9,444,238 1,208,089 14.7% Debt Service Fund Debt Service 1,876,102 4,059,667 4,060,392 5,756,085 1,696,418 41.8% Total 1,876,102 4,059,667 4,060,392 5,756,085 1,696,418 41.8% Special Revenue- Parks/Recreation Fund Operations 0 0 0 0 0 #DIV/0! Capital Outlay 200,082 0 0 0 0 #DIV/0! Total 200,082 0 0 0 0 #DIV/0! TIF Fund Personnel 34,719 131,625 100,288 0 (131,625) -100.0% Operations 5,846 11,500 5,800 0 (11,500) -100.0% Total 40,565 143,125 106,088 0 (11,500) -8.0% Crime Control District Fund Personnel 0 103,050 76,392 107,023 3,973 3.9% Operations 2,464 1,560 1,560 1,680 120 7.7% Capital Outlay 105,640 176,810 0 0 17( 6,810) -100.0% Total 108,104 281,420 77,952 108,703 (176.690) -62.8% SPDC Fund Personnel 51,314 46,314 54,430 67,098 20,784 44.9% Operations 900 4,200 3,600 3,600 (600) -14.3% Debt Service 652,293 656,125 739,896 882,583 226,458 34.5% Total 704,507 706,639 797,926 953,281 246,642 34.9% GRAND TOTAL ALL FUNDS 24,116,120 29,145,792 27,512,985 33,661,288 -,q --1 � 4,643,149 15.9% PAGE 13 "EXHIBIT A" PROPOSED BUDGET 1999-00 ALL FUNDS SUMMARY EXPENDITURES BY FUND/DIVISION/CATEGORY 1998-99 1998-99 1999-00 $ Increase/ % Increase/ 1997-98 Adopted Revised Proposed (Decrease) -Decrease GENERAL FUND Actual Budget Budget Budget Adopted Adopted City Secretary/Mayor/Council Personnel 109,199 136,086 134,854 172,478 36,392 26.7% Operations 107,384 159,802 114,097 168,396 8,594 5.4% Capital Outlay 10,210 5,285 1,500 0 (5,285) -100.0% Total 226,793 301,173 250,451 340,874 39,701 13.2% Human Resources Personnel 112,999 117,754 118,963 150,171 32,417 27.5% Operations 120,480 91,846 94,351 114,434 22,588 24.6% Capital Outlay 444 0 200 1,500 1,500 100.0% Total 233,923 209,600 213,514 266,105 56,505 27.0% City Manager's Office Personnel 287,952 310,983 418,941 334,440 23,457 7.5% Operations 40,018 40,020 33,190 38,952 (1,068) -2.7% Capital Outlay 3,654 0 405 300 300 100.0% Total 331,624 351,003 452,536 373,692 22,689 6.5% Support Services Personnel 30,336 73,802 73,802 281,311 207,509 281.2% Operations 1,440,047 1,571,846 1,251,413 1,681,605 109,759 7.0% Capital Outlay 28,324 880,886 562,890 719,184 16( 1,702) -18.4% Total 1,498,707 2,526,534 1,888,105 2,682,100 155,566 6.2% Finance Personnel 263,377 268,606 259,473 345,297 76,691 28.6% Operations 133,462 178,559 179,070 165,743 (12,816) -7.2% Capital Outlay 2,496 7,000 7,000 0 (7,000) -100.0% Total 399,335 454,165 445,543 511,040 56,875 12.5% Municipal Court Personnel 151,033 167,775 169,875 228,734 60,959 36.3% Operations 108,167 129,156 133,683 132,188 3,032 2.3% Capital Outlay 6,776 7,839 8,412 0 (7,839) -100.0% Total 265,976 304,770 311,970 360,922 56,152 18.4% Teen Court Personnel 37,170 41,979 41,980 52,071 10,091 24.0% Operations 22,416 50,294 46,934 24,512 (25,782) -51.3% Capital Outlay 0 360 525 0 3( 60) -100.0% Total 59,586 92,633 89,439 76,583 (16,051) -17.3% Fire Services Personnel 1,196,990 1,328,943 1,323,482 1,515,507 186,564 14.0% Operations 255,290 320,014 346,999 315,950 (4,064) -1.3% Capital Outlay 332,182 208,868 208,868 78,680 13( 0,188) -62.3% Total 1,784,462 1,857,825 1,879,349 1,910,137 52,312 2.8% JA-1(p PAGE 14 "EXHIBIT A" PROPOSED BUDGET 1999-00 ALL FUNDS SUMMARY EXPENDITURES BY FUND/DIVISION/CATEGORY 1998-99 1998-99 1999-00 $ Increase/ % Increase/ 1997-98 Adopted Revised Proposed (Decrease) -Decrease GENERAL FUND Actual Budget Budget Budget Adopted Adopted Police Services Personnel 2,308,095 2,798,647 2,478,599 3,062,232 263,585 9.4% Operations 299,393 381,736 369,904 370,022 (11,714) -3.1% Capital Outlay 214,965 237,863 237,863 244,305 6,442 2.7% Total 2,822,454 3,418,246 3,086,366 3,676,559 258,313 7.6% Public Safety Support Personnel 738,122 789,698 833,419 813,021 23,323 3.0% Operations 194,555 242,640 133,419 139,409 (103,231) -42.5% Capital Outlay 71,880 24,098 14,898 2,940 (21,158) -87.8% Total 1,004,557 1,056,436 981,736 955,370 (101,066) -9.6% Building Inspection Personnel 468,334 540,516 545,516 752,953 212,437 39.3% Operations 65,818 83,007 51,768 81,408 (1,599) -1.9% Capital Outlay 32,899 69,373 99,565 60,000 (9,373) -13.5% Total 567,051 692,896 696,849 894,361 201,465 29.1% Streets/Drainage Personnel 422,160 443,933 426,537 528,769 84,837 19.1% Operations 340,681 439,234 411,854 422,420 (16,814) -3.8% Capital Outlay 57,880 56,000 56,000 123,600 67,600 120.7% Total 820,721 939,167 894,391 1,074,789 135,623 14.4% Public Works Administration Personnel 443,871 549,967 480,672 731,930 181,962 33.1% Operations 299,358 207,912 241,977 198,003 (9,909) -4.8% Capital Outlay 40,139 45,850 42,563 7,700 (38,150) -83.2% Total 783,368 803,729 765,212 937,633 133,903 16.7% Planning Personnel 431,282 476,691 430,273 562,140 85,449 17.9% Operations 52,226 54,789 54,713 64,339 9,550 17.4% Capital Outlay 5,810 0 792 950 950 100.0% Total 489,319 531,480 485,778 627,429 95,949 18.1 % Economic Development Personnel 66,079 68,097 95,680 171,230 103,133 151.4% Operations 50,693 76,735 67,625 82,775 6,040 7.9% Capital Outlay 0 0 3,785 0 0 0.0% Total 116,773 144,832 167,090 254,005 109,173 75.4% Community Services Personnel 213,849 233,645 218,180 303,543 69,898 29.9% Operations 121,563 181,786 147,505 244,975 63,189 34.8% Capital Outlay 3,319 1,400 1,400 1,350 (50) -3.6% Total 338,731 416,831 367,085 549,868 133,037 31.9% PAGE 15 "EXHIBIT A" PROPOSED BUDGET 1999-00 ALL FUNDS SUMMARY EXPENDITURES BY FUND/DIVISION/CATEGORY 1998-99 1998-99 1999-00 $Increase/ % Increase/ 1997-98 Adopted Revised Proposed (Decrease) -Decrease GENERAL FUND Actual Budget Budget Budget Adopted Adopted Parks and Recreation Personnel 491,927 596,975 456,767 734,363 137,387 23.0% Operations 601,913 697,626 611,052 920,725 223,099 32.0% Capital Outlay 60,495 160,390 127,859 90,420 (69,970) -43.6% Total 1,154,334 1,454,991 1,195,678 1,745,508 290,516 20.0% Library Services Personnel 0 0 0 40,368 40,368 100.0% Operations 0 152,480 95,000 121,640 (30,840) -20.2% Capital Outlay 0 10,000 10,000 0 (10,000) -100.0% Total 0 162,480 105,000 162,008 (472) -0.3% TOTAL GENERAL FUND 12,897,713 15,718,792 14,276,092 17,398,983 1,680,191 10.7% IA�19 PAGE 16 "EXHIBIT a" PROPOSED BUDGET 1999-00 ALL FUNDS SUMMARY EXPENDITURES BY FUND/DIVISION/CATEGORY 1998-99 1998-99 1999-00 $ Increase/ % Increase/ 1997-98 Adopted Revised Proposed (Decrease) -Decrease Actual Budget Budget Budget Adopted Adopted UTILITY FUND Utility Billing Personnel 0 189,385 197,245 186,966 (2,419) -1.3% Operations 0 64,036 60,983 68,511 4,475 7.0% Capital Outlay 0 50,000 63,000 14,500 (35,500) -71.0% Total 0 303,421 321,228 269,977 (33,444) -11.0% Water Utilities Personnel 692,652 614,162 595,289 798,176 184,014 30.0% Operations 3,851,671 3,475,778 3,455,695 4,018,653 542,875 15.6% Capital Outlay 422,677 414,400 410,100 568,400 154,000 37.2% Total 4,966,999 4,504,340 4,461,084 5,385,229 880,889 19.6% Wastewater Utilities Personnel 222,658 229,495 225,391 291,957 62,462 27.2% Operations 472,430 400,181 389,291 466,831 66,650 16.7% Capital Outlay 187,258 117,570 116,400 285,800 168,230 143.1% Total 882,347 747,246 731,082 1,044,588 297,342 39.8% Sanitation Operations 496,147 560,000 560,000 624,000 64,000 11.4% Total 496,147 560,000 560,000 624,000 64,000 11.4% Non -Departmentalized Debt Service 1,943,552 2,121,141 2,121,141 2,120,443 (698) 0.0% Total 1,943,552 2,121,141 2,121,141 2,120,443 (698) 0.0% TOTAL UTILITY FUND 8,289,045 8,236,149 8,194,535 9,444,238 1,208,089 14.7% DEBT SERVICE FUND Principal 1,061,750 1,996,582 1,996,582 2,506,754 510,172 25.6% Interest 809,748 2,057,085 2,057,085 3,241,331 1,184,246 57.6% Administrative Expenses 4,604 6,000 6,725 8,000 2,000 33.3% Total 1,876,102 4,059,667 4,060,392 5,756,085 1,696,418 41.8% SPECIAL REVENUE PARKS & RECREATION FUND Operations 0 0 0 0 0 0.0% Capital Outlay 200,082 0 0 0 0 0.0% Total 200,082 0 0 0 0 0.0% TIF FUND Personnel 34,719 131,625 100,288 0 (131,625) -100.0% Operations 5,846 11,500 5,800 0 (11,500) -100.0% Capital Outlay 0 0 0 0 0 0.0% Total 40,565 143,125 106,088 0 (143,125) -100.0% `7A -1 � PAGE 17 "Ek i 1IB!T A" PROPOSED BUDGET 1999-00 ALL FUNDS SUMMARY EXPENDITURES BY FUND/DIVISION/CATEGORY 1998-99 1998-99 1999-00 $ Increase/ % Increase/ 1997-98 Adopted Revised Proposed (Decrease) -Decrease Actual Budget Budget Budget Adopted Adopted CRIME CONTROL DISTRICT FUND Personnel 0 103,050 76,392 107,023 3,973 3.9% Operations 2,464 1,560 1,560 1,680 120 7.7% Capital Outlay 105,640 176,810 0 0 176 810 -100.0% Total 108,104 281,420 77,952 108,703 (172,717) -61.4% SPDC FUND Personnel 51,314 46,314 54,430 67,098 20,784 44.9% Operations & Maintenance 900 4,200 3,600 3,600 (600) -14.3% Capital Outlay 0 0 0 0 0 0.0% Debt Service 652,293 656,125 739,896 882,583 226,458 34.5% Total 704,507 706,639 797,926 953,281 246,642 34.9% GRAND TOTAL - ALL FUNDS 24,116,118 29,145,792 27,512,985 33,661,288 4,831,339 16.6% 14 PAGE 18 'v7A ��o "F` HiRr'T A" Qw W Y Q J 2 F O N LL O H U W r n W N F NF N N W O W W yW377Z yW I O Z m W O O uVi 'y O S C C O O O O Z O 0 0 ❑❑ y ¢ s� Z U '- ~~ a w W❑ w w F W W~ W J W ¢ J O F z N e ~ w a o u r l f� � r vOi ❑ i W � Y � � � � � � � 5 � � _ � °z w a J I o S ' W S O U V Z U V V y V U V ZU' < U W ❑ V < 0 Iw< W U I = y l27 O I N O ( N 0❑ N 0 Jr,5N N ❑ N O O UZS2 y y1 O w (Z7 p U Q < d O as as««s assay««««««« «sssas««sss II I aa» -.]a as «sg_�w = QY xa I t7 a § 1 - a a S.1929 $ a « « s s & « « « « « $ 8 3 2 E z LL as s a § a sasa«�«« «�s«say «g «g» «a s a a«fig w Y 3 l $ a ala a§ a , - ail «gg«§-. o j a _ R a F= z _ ❑ Y y� W W Z 'o W a¢ O i m Y O� �' ° W > o w' g >< i ° o a ° z ° Q O U> J J m W V O Fi ; Z 2< Z 4 2 ❑S Z W W � W O Q N W, x U= a y H O Z OF F Y j y�F ry Q <N¢< '� WT � .- y W FFZ Y 6 O ¢ W J O O eZe 7 l m y W w O> G OOV ZN 2 W 3 Q Z 2 O O 4 O IY 2 O O y � W O Q❑Q �¢u N n 1= N 7�� y U i� Om K� F O 8 i� Z g S � J O?❑ y¢ w Z O 0 ¢ U� ~ O Y 0 0 0 O Z r S I W W V N O ❑ y a O LL 1!� U ¢ ] Z O V W W$ Z F O zz Z F O O= F Q W Z N y N Z ❑ 0 0 Z Z z Z 0 0 Z Z= 0 0 0 ❑ 0 < W TT V W F S K w Z w~ w 2 ¢ Z 2 2 U Z 2 Z<>1¢u x 2¢ W$ 2 rc Z i❑¢ Z Z Z Z a z�� 2 y 2 J hg W w o= z LL Y 0 o O w> O_ g> a4 ry O O= O ^ y N 0 1� y H Z N Z❑❑ 2 f 3. Z rv->_ y 2121 ♦ N �p ID �-7 A — c�- / CL U a "PAGE 19 461wYUTi2iT All w Y g 0 0 r U n w r O C W ❑ N SOS ZZZ �> vi < w r H J Z Y O O J w ¢ Z° ¢Wi 1 z z Z7 ¢ O z J 2 a z% y O V z of J c N Q Zo o of S U u J = z w 1J O N p p O 6 v-1 U pl QWQ i� ❑ S $ O a8g8 �� ass �� .9ss a, �s »�«« a »»» «s« «««»« «as »» Q r LLp p - a I � » o « » 8 $ $ S 8 $ » & « S a 8 z K " w aeyeyey> � z 3 o p W g w_ Y a u 3 < zz °Wx < 3 a w a i ; z 3> a " m S w p r ¢ o i u z c� s J❑ ¢ Y 5 F 3 ❑ < gg 3 L- J O r< w J >a < O w y a Z o f Z i Z o O <❑ o rui p= ¢ J o g $ o a z -zp w r rSj FZ Z Jy w Y i 2 Y K < z y 2 J u Z e1 W z O U H O 22Y LL y 2 Zp v _ j 2 of m z _ > J? O F t iZp IU U N U v y of V oQZ F W $ q oQ2 F ywj U m p O F ¢ Or F 2 7 pp Y Z g O>¢ W p yUj C 6 W OZ .� w m Z U ZZ $ r C W- m 2 1 c� O Z Z Z < °o z 1< 2 V a V m o w U¢ J W O p F J j U 2 0 S2 Or S 0 I O 0 y� K u2 Y S" q(' tYy 7 ci F w 'y w i_ y a S m N O ¢ m p 6 Z¢ O tw- H y 2 J¢¢ 0❑ z¢ in 2 N O¢ Q ¢ z w LL• Z z Z 0 LL m 44 w F p> ¢ i f N i N i O O a¢y ` 2 Z g p z z z o< __$ Z z p<< W y S Y z< 3 I W W'o > m o J u� rc N F LL �jY O Z w u" O z N V w O i¢ LL r .1 J LL d , LL J W Q i < V pn z 8❑ o V S Op m < }q( J 7 .I iv W i<S Z O¢ U W " Q Z im w LL J LL LL -' j< ❑ j b qq[ W�Wrr Z O¢ = _ w$ S ` `aayy F u1 z Z W 2 Z>> Z Z rZ i Z V ` S 2 V O W S ul O O r Y k 3 i (µzJl p❑ 2z Z= Y Y = U= �j : 1¢ LL r � O U a '•+� F 6$$ F 1 m I J wU Z C � p O m 3 3 3❑ z�. z w H z i z vi 3 w❑ w Z i�� LL m a w w W z Z z z O z O WN -� R maoac'om�mmma°pom8irnrnm�rn`�immrn000 o�o�000 a „PAGE 20 IN w Y Q 2 r 7 O N LL O T U U � N m I I Q 2 jig j WI yNi � O ui N N J< U WO O O W° U tW] � z 0;; : s �Tl i ti I »i» »I Q = 4 a g r 1 « «~ o _ r »I ti» ' »RIM S 8 « 8 S 8 » $ $ « o « 8 « »i« « « $I a> 8 � �»I�� n3 i i _�� i � - a Iz I NIM w $ 8 « » 8 1 $ « n I xN _ A six g i �i i I W 0 5 ¢ 2 c a IT h i o c0 i u? z e z i Z Lu N ° j V 0 O (F� � U u N W y 1u N 3< a N 2 2> r y S <¢ J¢ O J w O N J O¢ U N N O U> V K FO W O O w 2 O W S N y Y W W dZ1 W OOE ? yj W< 11� W O 6 ¢ Z S O 4< >> W w W GZ S m I ° 2 2 5 F> Z S y 2 O¢ Q u w j n R O J N C z N i N O K S W� w z¢ yY_ W o m S W W O S< Y S U W W 1< p< y (y� W< YYJ W; z Z W¢ K K m U 6 W 2 S W V 5 w a S - G S= to g O W V LL W S Z m�WXx�oza�o�as 6 1 (75. J C a_ 5 a U S N N N N i 2`<< :) S S U U N C V Z S Fp S F R 2 O S U Nm O S Y I S Up S r W V NCN ^ N ^ N N y Q^ fp m ( th f^ Q Q Q f F.;,! Q Q oo5 N N N Q N UN] ( N N N N m tD m CL U 'PAGE 21 (aw r LL 0 3 O O) 00 LL F Z W i W O X a i J Q F a Q U I W � i O < O y � a ° U ¢ I i i i I a ei Q �R I obi m a M o m o 3 S m 8 8 S g 5 8 a 8 � � S b 1�1 S A A m O; Nyyf Yf N N Y m N m N♦♦ b 01 N Y YY 0 0 m A N N O O O O � A OI M R S A m a m o$ w N O N O O b N Yf .0000 b M M N N Vf _ C O o 0 0 C C C yi H N H N N N O �� Ib NI O N OI b M — e Z. O w rl Y x N w w C w N a N gg b act N N m In A A N N A N 8 W A N N m N Yf b- N N A M ¢ W p O �� e P H 000000 COO e'f N e7 n O N m b N bp N N Y � p Q r N P H $p5 O I O_ N N N Z i IN N W w O T M Of O� O O N N 7Nf J O� 3 P N � pq W µzW¢I 7 a w P N N N N N N F O U O Q O � 5R� Q 7f � _ mn o,hnNoa m p p a � 00000000--o ,XH HHw -- �i uoi$ww S X �oY eyi_ma ob i ¢ A e�m ri mbm m fv c � � oe� y 3 Yf b N N N 1p N b N N O N O O N ~ m � W 2 � C N N pp N H N M M N iI1 N N N N N N N pp M H H N C ~ ~ e1 � � It n T vi of ri r � 1C'V O a vi N N O n = ri U F 53j Y1y W LL N OI b m N b b w �V 10 N A N A N u w i b G cN JO < G Z W O p ¢ i O J Z -u 0o �� g u Z < 3 o ° m u z za v U ° w¢ u z o z o= z z u Z m 3 y :7 OUc70Q ZL � z O U w 3 w p 3 O Z ZL J U i o? Oi i O 7 V% F r p I!� w G 1'? W O 6 SF N < U Z z_ {y7 U LLl ° F: Z O n 2 i m XWQ ul O t�iJ Z _ y" LL (n O w Z a' Z �R 6< y 0 0 0 Z a' Z LL~ W 2 r F O }~ 6' h O U Z F' d s W O p w F C U= F, 5 O J >~> C W4 W ifl W Z Z zzQ ¢ W N W O a U W O yY S a y C> O w W = '�' J Q` = C U c W Y~ Z ~` Z Z a J< U ..1 O F W i a V C q O o< J! a LL LL yOW1 -� W 2 a p y J a O p`` y¢ y m r n '�` W �j - z� a J J J W J W W U p ¢ J ¢ n¢ O cr ' 6.L cr W D_ U F.. O c U F p W Z W$ tl 0 2 U> a yyw C 2 _-$ L�-�F�>� W 0.' _ LL1 _. y ry J C J J U 4: W z < J U 4] W° 1 Y y v W z a z Z J O m m m m m QaO¢7 J F= W 3 2 u� O¢ K W W K' .7 'ai fal 3 G -- W N U :y °°° U U �yuj N Y J ° h t- W ¢0 o Q n VJ WwWww Q < ¢o d `�iO O2m-Cuw'2 c7 ri �uOJ.y -OUCz0% LM O � =00000� Oao.a}°F-iziwF"'z >y z Xo�, > m¢»i a K m� =3 D u.htiN0V1 D:3 � u o n f7 ? : C :i7 T a3vi U�: v�0 <,. n3 Cam maUJ3 <OFoUO v: F0- I^ o--n r: A'n `r-n mn A'oo aomm-anommmw 8imrnrn�i m `�i oAirn �'g000$o�oogi'�: N N N N N N N N N N �� N N N N OPAGE 22 } 2 U. O Q.' w O1 QY CO f- U. 7 o OtF.. LL W O ~a v� z w i W O w a f J Q H a Q U wl wj z1 2 Z Z N- W u W t1 a ( �W w O x W O I a z c m < z � m o sus^ os o w a y a - = w 4 0 d r g d w - = S o gc w wlv� L7 � w w h Y a W N " F o � m 0 Z i " U w " w w 0 H W )O C U :L n � v y Q n Z a o y 1 o w aq w6 v0~i N 7 2% oo 3 9i On q i 4 3 i N Ix W I 4l Z`S W w2W R z Z Q o "�u0 J w v z C: -�oCU 1 LL �uu a a 5 w z cj u:cl o o w 3 y y o° Wig= i o i W�p1 pz o g Fz g�rn< o o a a1 C, w 4 r 4 is oo u n> N N f7 ^ N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N fJ N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N BIT A" 'i ,PAGE 23 ORDINANCE NO. 756 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS, APPROVING REVISED BUDGET FIGURES FOR FISCAL YEAR 1998-99; APPROVING AND ADOPTING THE BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING OCTOBER 1, 1999, AND TERMINATING SEPTEMBER 30, 2000, AND MAKING APPROPRIATIONS FOR EACH DEPARTMENT, PROJECT AND ACCOUNT; REPEALING CONFLICTING ORDINANCES; PROVIDING A SAVINGS AND SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City Manager has prepared a revision of certain figures in the 1998-99 budget and submitted same to the City Council; and, WHEREAS, the City Manager of the City of Southlake, Texas (hereinafter referred to as the "City") has caused to be filed with the City Secretary a budget to cover all proposed expenditures of the government of the City for the fiscal year beginning October 1, 1999, and ending September 30, 2000, (hereinafter referred to as the "Budget"); and WHEREAS, the Budget, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein for all purposes, shows as definitely as possible each of the various projects for which appropriations are set up in the Budget. and the estimated amount of money carried in the Budget for each of such projects; and WHEREAS, the Budget has been filed with the City Secretary for at least thirty (30) days and available for inspection by any taxpayer; and WHEREAS, public notice of public hearings on the proposed annual budget, stating the dates, times, places and subject matter of said public hearings, was given as required by the Charter of the City of Southlake and the laws of the State of Texas; and WHEREAS, such public hearings were held on August 31, 1999 and September 7, 1999, prior approval of such dates being hereby ratified and confirmed by the City Council, and all those wishing to speak on the Budget were heard; and WHEREAS, the City Council has studied the Budget and listened to the comments of the taxpayers at the public hearings held therefor and has determined that the Budget attached hereto is in the best interest of the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS: Section 1. That all of the above premises are found to be true and correct and are incorporated into the body of this Ordinance as if copied in their entirety. Section 2. That the revised figures, prepared and submitted by the City Manager for the 1998-99 budget, be, and the same are hereby, in all things, approved and appropriated, and any -7A-acp Ordinance No. 756 Page 2 L X necessary transfers between accounts and departments are hereby authorized, approved, and appropriated. Section 3. That the Budget attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein for all purposes is adopted for the Fiscal Year beginning October 1, 1999, and ending September 30, 2000; and there is hereby appropriated from the funds indicated such projects, operations, activities, purchases and other expenditures as proposed in the Budget. Section 4. That the City Manager shall file or cause to be filed a true and correct copy of the approved Budget, along with this ordinance, with the City Secretary and in the office of the County Clerks of Denton and Tarrant County, Texas, as required by State law. Section 5. That any and all ordinances, resolutions, rules, regulations, policies or provisions in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby repealed and rescinded to the extent of conflict herewith. Section 6. If any section, article, paragraph, sentence, clause, phrase or word in this Ordinance, or application thereto any person or circumstances is held invalid or unconstitutional by a Court of competent jurisdiction, such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance; and the City Council hereby declares it would have passed such remaining portions of this Ordinance despite such invalidity, which remaining portions shall remain in full force and effect. Section 7. That the necessity of adopting and approving a proposed budget for the next fiscal year as required by the laws of the State of Texas requires that this Ordinance shall take effect immediately from and after its passage, and it is accordingly so ordained. PASSED AND APPROVED on first reading this day of 1999. ATTEST: Sandra L. LeGrand City Secretary 1999. Rick Stacy, Mayor PASSED AND APPROVED ON second reading this `7A-a-7 day of , Ordinance No. 756 Page 3 ATTEST: Sandra L. LeGrand City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney Date: Adopted: Effective: Si:1 W D-FILESIORDINANCI'09-BGr-0RD. DOC/kb (40w, Rick Stacy, Mayor -� A - 9,'9 City of Southlake, Texas MEMORANDUM September 3, 1999 TO: Billy Campbell, City Manager FROM: Garland Wilson, Director of Public Safety SUBJECT: Ordinance No. 693-B, 2nd Reading, Providing outdoor lighting regulations. Action Requested: City Council consideration of Ordinance No. 693-B on second reading. Background Information: This ordinance was originally requested by former Councilmember Pam Muller to provide guidelines for commercial lighting requirements compatible with adjacent residential property. City Plans Examiner Chuck Bloomberg met with Councilmember Muller and Mayor Stacy at least twice while developing the basic text of this ordinance. During the development of this ordinance, the City experienced a significant lighting issue at the Tetco convenience store, further identifying lighting issues. The draft lighting information was forwarded to the city attorney's office to be put into ordinance form. The draft ordinance was discussed by City Council on July 20, 1999 with direction given to staff for recommended changes. This item was presented to the P&Z at the July 22, 1999 meeting; however, due to the length of the P&Z agenda, the discussion was tabled until the August 5, 1999 meeting. The P&Z provided input to the staff with no substantive changes to the revised draft ordinance. A revised draft incorporating those changes was submitted to the City Attorney for review and comment. The proposed ordinance establishes measurable limits on outdoor lighting projecting onto private property from commercial establishments, and incorporates those items recommended by the City Council. The City Attorney reviewed the revised draft and has recommended adoption of the ordinance as a stand-alone ordinance instead of incorporation into the Uniform Building Code. The ordinance will include language that will continue to require a plan review process to be considered by both the P&Z and City Council and administrative procedures consistent with the UBC, including the right to review for variance by the City Council. The City Council approved first reading of the ordinance at the August 17, 1999 City Council Meeting. Financial Considerations: Not Applicable Citizen Input/ Board Review: No citizen input has been received. Not subject to any Board review. 7B-1 Billy Campbell September 3, 1999 Page 2 Legal Review: This ordinance was forwarded to City Attorney Debra Drayovitch for legal review and comment. Alternatives: The City Council may approve the ordinance on second reading as submitted, or they may deny or recommend changes or conditions they deem appropriate. Supporting Documents: Staff Recommendation: GW/bls Ordinance No. 693-B Place Ordinance No. 693-13, on the September 7, 1999 City Council meeting for second reading. Approved for Submittal to City Council: City Manager's Office 7B-2 ORDINANCE NO.693-B AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING REQUIREMENTS FOR OUTDOOR LIGHTING; ESTABLISHING ILLUMINATION STANDARDS; ESTABLISHING LUMINANCE LIMITS; PROVIDING THAT THIS ORDINANCE SHALL BE CUMULATIVE OF CERTAIN ORDINANCES; PROVIDING A PENALTY FOR VIOLATIONS; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; 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 if the Texas Local Government Code; and WHEREAS, the City of Southlake has previously adopted regulations providing for requirements for outdoor lighting in certain zoning districts; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it is necessary to provide for more comprehensive regulations regarding the provision of outdoor lighting on private property within the City; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS: SECTION 1. PURPOSE This Ordinance sets forth minimum criteria for the installation, use and maintenance of outdoor lighting, the purposes of which are to: (a) preserve and enhance the lawful nighttime use and enjoyment of property; (b) protect drivers and pedestrians on nearby travel ways from disabling glare from non -vehicular light sources that shine directly into their eyes and thereby impair safe travel; ORDINANCE NO. 693-B PAGE l of 11 Lighting Ordinance Final version 8-26-99.doc 7R-S (c) shield neighboring properties from nuisance glare and trespass resulting from improperly directed or unshielded shield light sources; (d) preclude or lessen light pollution; (e) promote efficient design and operation with regard to energy conservation; and to (f) curtail the degradation of the nighttime visual environment. SECTION 2. EXEMPTIONS (a) The following uses shall be exempt from the requirements of this Ordinance: (1) Lighting installed on property used for a single-family or two-family dwelling; (2) Lighting, such as street lights and traffic signal devices, installed by a governmental agency for public benefit on public rights -of -way or property. (3) Temporary special effects of holiday lighting. (4) Lighting which is not subject to this Ordinance by state or federal law. (5) Specific exemptions as may be recommended by the planning and zoning commission and approved by the city council during a development, site plan, or other similar review process so long as the requirements of Section 9 are met. (b) Other temporary lighting effects may be used for a period not to exceed 10 days if approved by the building official or his designated representative. Any person may submit a written request, on a form furnished by the city, to the building official for a temporary exemption. The building official shall consider the following information in determining whether to approve a request for temporary exemption: ORDINANCE NO.693-B PAGE 2 of I Lighting Ordinance Final version 8-26-99.doc N 7B-4 (1) specific exemption requested; (2) type and use of outdoor light fixture involved; (3) duration of time for the requested exemption; (4) type of lamp and calculated lumens; (5) proposed location on premises of the outdoor light fixture; and (6) physical size of outdoor light fixtures and type of shielding provided. (c) An applicant may appeal any denial of such application to the city council, by requesting a modification in accordance with Section 10. Such appeal must be filed with the building official not more than 10 days after the denial. SECTION 3. DEFINITIONS The following words when used in this Ordinance, shall have the meanings ascribed to them in this section, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning: Bollard luminaire means a luminaire on a pole not over 42 inches in height designed to project light below a horizontal plane running through the top of the fixture. Candela means the unit of luminous intensity in a given direction. It is commonly called one candlepower. Diffusing Luminaires means a luminaire that scatters light substantially in all directions as contrasted with a directional luminaire which confines its light principally in an angle of less than 180 degrees. Floodlight means a luminaire designed to project its light in a defined area. It is directional in character. Floodlight beam means the angular spread of light between two orthogonal planes each of which equal ten percent of the maximum candlepower within the beam. ORDINANCE NO.693-B PAGE 3 of 11 Lighting Ordinance Final version 8-26-99.doc 7B-5 Footcandle means the amount of illumination provided by one lumen uniformly distributed on one square foot of surface. Footlambert means the luminance of a surface uniformly emitting, transmitting, or reflecting one lumen per square foot of surface. Illumination means the density of the luminous flux (lumens) incident on a surface. It is the quotient of the luminous flux divided by the area of the surface, expressed in foot candles. Light source means a device (such as a lamp) which produces visible energy as distinguished from devices or bodies that reflect or transmit light, such as a luminaire. Lumen means the quantity of luminous flux intercepted by a surface of one square foot, all points of which are one foot from a uniform source of one candela. A one -candela source provides 12.57 lumens. Luminaire means a device or fixture containing a light source and means for directing and controlling the distribution of light from the source. Luminance means the luminous intensity per unit projected area of a given surface viewed from a given direction for purposes of this Ordinance expressed in candelas divided by distance squared. Glare means light emitting from a luminaire with an intensity great enough to reduce a viewer's ability to see. SECTION 4. LIGHTING DESIGN (a) Lighting systems, including the placement of luminaires, shall meet the requirements of this Ordinance. (b) Luminaires on poles over 42 inches in height and exterior wall mounted light fixtures shall be high pressured sodium lights or other lights giving a similar soft lighting effect. The building official may approve alternate lighting if he finds that it: ORDINANCE NO.693-B PAGE 4 of 11 Lighting Ordinance Final version 8-26-99.doc 7B-6 A (1) provides at least approximate equivalence to the applicable specific requirements of this Ordinance; and (2) is otherwise satisfactory and complies with the intent of this Ordinance. (c) Fully recessed lights in ceilings of canopies or roof overhangs may be of any type provided the level of illumination does not exceed the limitations specified in Section 5 hereof. See Appendix Illustration B. (d) Luminaires causing glare at property line or in vehicle areas on streets or parking lots are prohibited. (e) Incandescent bulbs may be used as decorative lighting provided the individual lamps do not exceed 25 watts and do not otherwise conflict with this Ordinance. SECTION 5. ILLUMINATION (a) The intensity of illumination projected from one property to another property is determined by the zoning district classification of the neighboring property and shall not exceed the following intensities, as measured from the property line of the neighboring property: Zoning of Neighboring Property Footcandles Horizontal Footcandles Vertical Agricultural, Single-family, and two-family residential districts 0.2 0.5 Multiple -family residential districts 0.5 0.5 Nonresidential districts, streets 3.0 3.0 Light industrial districts 5.0 5.0 (b) The maximum outdoor computed or measured illumination level on a property shall not exceed 20 foot candles outdoors at any point, except that lighting under canopies (such as service stations) shall not exceed 30 foot candles. SECTION 6. ORDINANCE NO. 693-B PACE 5 of I Lighting Ordinance Final version 8-26-99.doc 7B-7 MEASUREMENT. (a) Meter required. Lighting levels of outdoor lighting shall be measured in foot candles with a direct reading portable light meter with a color and cosine corrected sensor with multiple scales. The meter shall read within an accuracy of plus or minus five percent. It shall have been tested and calibrated by an independent commercial photometric laboratory or the manufacturer within one year of date of use as attested to by a certificate issued by such laboratory. (b) Horizontal method of measurement. The meter sensor shall be mounted not more than six inches above ground level in a horizontal position. Readings shall be taken only after the cell has been exposed to provide a constant reading. Measurements shall be made when the meteorological optical range is six miles or further so that measurements will not be adversely affected by atmospheric scatter. Measurements shall be made after dark with the existing questioned light sources on, then with the same sources off. This procedure eliminates the effects of moonlight and other ambient light. The difference between the two readings shall be compared to the footcandle ratings listed in Section 5(a) hereof. (c) Vertical method of measurement. The meter sensor shall be mounted at five feet above ground level in a vertical position, perpendicular to the property line and facing the outdoor lighting in question. Reading shall be taken only after the cell has been exposed to provide a constant reading. Measurements shall be made (460, after dark with the existing questioned light sources on, then with the same sources off. This procedure eliminates the effects of moonlight and other ambient light. The difference between the two readings shall be compared to the footcandle ratings listed in Section 5(a) hereof. (d) Computation of illumination. Illumination at a point may be computed in lieu of measurement. Computation methods shall consist of a generally accepted Illuminating Engineering society method, using certified photometric data furnished by the fixture manufacturer, lamp manufacturer, photometric laboratory, or other reliable authority satisfactory to the city. Computations shall be based on new, properly seasoned lamps, new and clean fixtures, and at rated voltage and wattage, with ballasts, lenses, shields, diffusers, and other appurtenances in place, and with proper regard taken for mounting height, relative elevation, natural and manmade objects. ORDINANCE NO. 693-B PAGE 6 of 13 Lighting Ordinance Final version 8-26-99.doc X SECTION 7. LUMINANCE. (a) Limits. The intensity of luminance projected from one property to another is determined by the zoning district classification of the neighboring property and shall not exceed the following limits: Zoning of Neighboring Property Luminance (1) Single-family and two-family residential districts 0.02 (2) Multiple -family residential districts 0.05 (3) Nonresidential districts, streets 0.30 (4) Industrial districts 0.50 (b) Calculations generally. Because of the lack of a practical means of measuring fixture luminance in the field, and because of the factors involved in glare, a computational method shall be used, the results of which determine compliance with this section. The point from which luminance calculations shall be made is five feet above ground at the property line of the property adjacent to the property with the outdoor lighting. (c) Luminance calculations using luminaire photometric data. Luminance shall be computed by the formula: L= I d2 + h2 where "I" is the fixture candlepower in candelas in the direction of the point from which the calculations are to be made, "d" is the shortest distance in feet measured horizontally from the property line to a point directly under the luminaire, and "h" is the height of the luminaire above the eye level as explained in Appendix A illustration. ORDINANCE NO.693-B PAGE 7 of 13 Lighting Ordinance Final version 8-26-99.doc 7B-9 SECTION 8. ENFORCEMENT. (a) Illumination in excess of limits. If the illumination, as measured, exceeds the limits stated in Section 5 hereof, the illumination shall be reduced until the illumination is equal to or less than the limits prescribed in Section 5. This may be accomplished by removal of the light, reduction in the quantity of luminaires, reduction of the wattage of the lamps, shielding the luminaires or aiming of the luminaires. (b) Luminance in excess of limits. If the luminance of a luminaire, as calculated, exceeds the limitations stated in Section 7 hereof, the luminance shall be reduced until the luminance is equal to or less than the limits prescribed in Section 7. This may be accomplished by reduction of the wattage of the lamps, shielding the luminaire of by re -aiming of the luminaires. (c) Shielding. Luminaires shall be aimed in such a manner that the viewer's eye, five feet above ground at or beyond the property line, shall not be exposed to fixture luminance within the floodlight beam of the luminaire. If such luminaires cannot be aimed they shall be shielded such that the light source is effectively concealed from view from the neighboring property. Shielding may be accomplished by louvers, baffles, visors, or shields placed on the luminaires, or by plantings, fences, berms, elevation, or any other method such that the limitations of Section QW 7 hereof are met. SECTION 9. PLANS AND SUBMITTALS. (a) Lighting plans submitted for review and approval for concept plans, site plans, and building permits shall include a schematic lay -out of all proposed exterior fixture locations, footcandle data, and a plot demonstrating intensities and uniformities within the limitations established in this Ordinance. (b) When requested by the building official, the applicant shall submit a visual impact photometric plan that demonstrates both light coverage and light spillage resulting from the proposed lighting plan and the provision for adequate measures to mitigate nuisance from light pollution and disabling glare both on the uses or development site and on adjacent properties. ORDINANCE NO.693-B PAGE 8 of 13 Lighting Ordinance Final version 8-26-99.doc 7B-10 (c) Should any outdoor light fixture or the type of light source be changed after receiving approval pursuant to this ordinance, the owner shall submit a change request to the building official for his approval, together with adequate information to assure compliance with this Ordinance. SECTION 10. APPEALS; MODIFICATIONS (a) The city council may grant a modification or variance from the provisions of this Ordinance, and the city council, after receiving a recommendation from the planning and zoning commission, may impose conditions on such modification or variance which it deems appropriate to further the purposes of this Ordinance, in either of the following circumstances: (1) Upon finding that strict application of the Ordinance would not forward the purposes of this Ordinance, or that alternatives proposed by the applicant would satisfy the purposes of this Ordinance at least to an equivalent degree. (2) Upon finding that an outdoor light, or system of outdoor lights required for a particular use cannot reasonably comply with the standard and provide sufficient illumination for safety, as determined by recommended practices adopted by the Illuminating Engineering Society of North American for the particular use or other evidence submitted by a professional engineer. (b) The city council may consider an appeal from a person who is dissatisfied with the decision of the building official. The person shall file an appeal in writing with the building official not more than 10 days after the determination of the building official. SECTION 11. CONFORMANCE WITH APPLICABLE CODES. All outdoor electrically powered illuminating devices shall be installed in conformance with the provisions of this Ordinance, the Building Code and the Electrical Code, as applicable. ORDINANCE NO.693-B PAGE 9 of 13 Lighting Ordinance Final version 8-26-99.doc X 7B-11 SECTION 12. EXISTING LIGHTING When outdoor lighting does not conform to the provisions of this Ordinance and lawfully exists on the effective date of this Ordinance, it shall be deemed a lawful use. Any change or addition to an existing lighting system shall, however, comply with the provisions of this Ordinance. SECTION 13. PENALTY Any person, firm or corporation who violates, disobeys, omits, neglects or refuses to comply with or who resists the enforcement of any of the provisions of this ordinance shall be fined not more than Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00) for each offense. Each day that a violation is permitted to exist shall constitute a separate offense. SECTION 14. PUBLICATION 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. ORDINANCE NO. 693-B PAGE 10 of 13 Lighting Ordinance Final version 8-26-99.doc 7B-12 SECTION 15. SEVERABILITY It is hereby declared to be the intention of the City Council that the phrases, clauses, sentences, paragraphs and sections of this ordinance are severable, and if any phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph or section of this ordinance shall be declared unconstitutional by the valid judgment or decree of any court of competent jurisdiction, such unconstitutionality shall not affect any of the remaining phrases, clauses, sentences, paragraphs and sections of this ordinance, since the same would have been enacted by the City Council without the incorporation in this ordinance of any such unconstitutional phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph or section. SECTION 16. CUMULATIVE CLAUSE This ordinance shall be cumulative of all provisions of ordinances of the City of Southlake, Texas, except where the provisions of this ordinance are in direct conflict with the provisions of such ordinances, in which event the conflicting provisions of such ordinances are hereby repealed. Specifically, this ordinance shall be cumulative of the provisions regarding outdoor lighting as contained in the Zoning Ordinance. ORDINANCE NO.693-B PAGE 11 of 13 Lighting Ordinance Final version 8-26-99.doc 7B-13 SECTION 17. EFFECTIVE DATE This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and publication as required by law, and it is so ordained. The provisions of this ordinance shall apply to all applications for building permits filed on or after the effective date. PASSED AND APPROVED ON FIRST READING ON THIS DAY OF 1999. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY PASSED AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING ON THIS DAY OF 1999. EFFECTIVE: APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: CITY ATTORNEY ORDINANCE NO.693-B PAGE 12 of 13 Lighting Ordinance Final version 8-26-99.doc X, ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY 7B-14 Factors for Luminance Determination A Factors for Luminance Determination Loaners Ropary M Crrdepowern ,\ a<aNm of ays r H � �1RLC7W— — — 10b- -T Omer r Ei D Ceiling Light in Canopy or Overhang c F4ch �a -) Ropdnp Lau Ft*j Recessed Rol Fully Recessed ORDINANCE NO.693-B PAGE 13 of 13 Lighting Ordinance Final version 8-26-99.doc 7E-15 %..ny vi QUUMIaKL-, Texas MEMORANDUM September 3, 1999 TO: Billy Campbell, City Manager FROM: Karen Gandy, Zoning Administrator, ext. 743 Art Wright, Zoning Assistant, ext. 828 SUBJECT: Ordinance No. 480-GG, Regarding Lighting and Glare, Second Reading Action Requested: City Council consideration of the proposed Ordinance No. 480-GG to revise certain provisions of Ordinance No. 480, as amended, regarding lights, lighting and glare. Background Information: The Building Department proposes to amend the Uniform Building Code (Ordinance No. 693-B) to incorporate detailed regulations on lighting and glare for non -single family residential properties. The purpose of this amendment is to establish measurable and enforceable criteria with respect to lighting to provide for the protection of the residents and the enjoyment of their property from nuisance or hazardous lighting and glare. As a result of this change in the Building Code, an amendment of Ordinance No. 480, as amended, is necessary to remove the general lighting regulations from the ordinance and replace them with appropriate references to the new lighting ordinance. Financial Considerations: Not applicable. Citizen Input/ Board Review: August 5, 1999; Planning and Zoning Commission voted to approve (5 - 0) August 17, 1999; City Council voted to approve (7 - 0) on consent Legal Reviews: This ordinance was reviewed by City Attorney, Debra Drayovitch, who has approved the ordinance presented to the City Council for consideration. Alternatives: The Council may recommend that the ordinance be submitted for consideration at the second reading by the Council as submitted, recommend changes or conditions they deem appropriate, or request to remove it from the list of priorities. N:\COMMUNITY DEVELOPN1ENTTWP-FILES\ZBA\PENDING\DRAFT ORDINANCES\LIGHTMEMO.DOC City of Southlake, Texas M Consideration on Proposed Ordinance No. 480-GG, regarding lighting and glare Karen Gandy, Zoning Administrator September 3, 1999 Page 2 Supporting Documents: Proposed Ordinance No. 480-GG. P&Z Action: August 5, 1999; Voted to approve (5 - 0) Ordinance No. 480-GG with the changes discussed and recommending whatever action on any other ordinances is necessary to comply with the changes contained in 480-GG. Council Action: August 17, 1999; Voted to approve (7 - 0) on consent. Staff Recommendation: Present to City Council for consideration. Approved for Submittal to City Council //--) ce City ger's Office KTOMMUNPY DEVELOPMENI\WP-FILESI7BA\PENDING\DRAFT ORDINANCESWGHTMEMO.DOC 'T C - 2- CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS ORDINANCE NO. 480-GG AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 480, AS AMENDED, THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS; REVISING CERTAIN PROVISIONS REGARDING LIGHTS, LIGHTING, AND GLARE; PROVIDING THAT THIS ORDINANCE SHALL BE CUMULATIVE OF ALL ORDINANCES; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY FOR VIOLATIONS HEREOF; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION IN PAMPHLET FORM; PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION IN THE OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City of Southlake, Texas is a home rule City acting under its Charter adopted by the electorate pursuant to Article XI, Section 5 of the Texas Constitution and Chapter 9 of the Texas Local Government Code; and, WHEREAS, the City has adopted Ordinance No. 480, as amended, as the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it is appropriate and in the best interest of the City to promote the public health, safety, and general welfare of its residents by amending Ordinance No. 480 as provided herein; and WHEREAS, the City Council has given published notice and held public hearings with respect to the amendment of the zoning ordinance as required by law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS: SECTION 1. Sections 20.5, 21.5, 22.5, 23.5, and 26.5 of Ordinance No. 480, as amended, is hereby amended by revising paragraphs (i), respectively to read as follows: NACOMMUNUY DEVELOPMEIIMWP-FILES\7BA\PENDING\DRAFr ORDINANCES\4804G.WPD (Draft I, dated 2115199) Page 1 -jc-3 "i. All exterior lighting designed for security, illumination, parking lot illumination or advertising and which is placed within this zoning district shall meet the requirements of the current lighting ordinance, as amended." SECTION 2. Section 25.5 of Ordinance No. 480, as amended, is hereby amended by revising paragraph (g), to read as follows: "g. All exterior lighting designed for security, illumination, parking lot illumination or advertising and which is placed within this zoning district meet the requirements of the current lighting ordinance, as amended." SECTION 3. Sections 24.5 and 27.5 of Ordinance No. 480, as amended, is hereby amended by revising paragraphs (h), respectively to read as follows: "h. All exterior lighting designed for security, illumination, parking lot illumination or advertising and which is placed within this zoning district shall meet the requirements of the current lighting ordinance, as amended." SECTION 4. Sections 24.10, 26.8, and 27.8 of Ordinance No. 480, as amended, is hereby amended by revising paragraphs (f), respectively to read as follows: "f. Glare: All artificial light sources shall meet the requirements of the current lighting ordinance, as amended." SECTION 5. Section 43.13 of Ordinance No. 480, as amended, is hereby amended by revising paragraph (i), to read as follows: "i. Spill -over lighting: No use or operation shall produce direct or indirect illumination across a residential property line except in compliance with the requirements of the current lighting ordinance, as amended. NACOMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT\WP-FILES\ZBA\PENDING\DRAFT ORDINANCES\480-GOAM (Draft 1. dated 2115199) Page 2 `ems 1 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. 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 9. 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 yard regulations 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 NACOMMUNMY DEVELOPMENT\WP-FILES\79A\PENDING\DRAFT 0RDINANCES\4WGG.WPD (Draft 1, dated 2115199) Page 3 -7 C , 7 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 pamphlet form for general distribution among the public, and the operative provisions of this ordinance as so published shall be admissible in evidence in all courts without further proof than the production thereof. SECTION 11. 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 final 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 date of passage and publication as required by law, and it is so ordained. NACOMMUNM DEVELOPMENT\WP-FILES\ZBA\PENDING\DRAFT 0RDINANCES\484GG.WPD (Draft 1, dated 2115199) Page 4 -10-'Oro PASSED AND APPROVED on the 1st reading the day of , 1999. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY PASSED AND APPROVED on the 2nd reading the day of ,1999. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: CITY ATTORNEY DATE: ADOPTED: EFFECTIVE: NACOMMUNITY DEVELOPMEN*nWP-PILES\ZBA\PENDING\DRAFf ORDINANCES\480-GG.WPD (Draft 1, dated 2115199) Page 5 I c- 7 City of Southlake, Texas STAFF REPORT September 3, 1999 CASE NO: ZA 99-066 PROJECT: Revised Site Plan — Southridge Executive Suites STAFF CONTACT: Dennis Killough, Senior Planner, 481-5581, ext. 787 REQUESTED ACTION: Revised Site Plan for Southridge Executive Suites on property legally described as Lot 12, Block 6, Southridge Lakes, Phase C-1, an addition to the City of Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas, according to the plat recorded in Cabinet A, Slide 4596, Plat Records, Tarrant County, Texas, being approximately 0.819 acres. PURPOSE: Site Plan approval is required prior to issuance of a building permit for the proposed carport. LOCATION: 1500 Corporate Circle being on the north side of Corporate Circle approximately 450' east of North Peytonville Avenue OWNER/APPLICANT: Four Peaks Development CURRENT ZONING: "C-3" General Commercial District LAND USE CATEGORY: Office Commercial NO. NOTICES SENT: Seven (7) RESPONSES: None P&Z ACTION: July 22, 1999; Due to Case Resolution No. 97-22, this case was not heard and will be continued to the August 5, 1999, Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. August 5, 1999; Denied (5-0). COUNCIL ACTON: August 17, 1999; Approved (7-0) to table and to continue the Public Hearing to the September 7, 1999, City Council meeting. STAFF COMMENTS: Attached is Site Plan Review Summary No. 2, dated September 3, 1999. NACOMMUNITY DEVELOPMENnWP-FILES\MEMO\99CASES\99-066SP.DOC 54 - 25 13 12 a � = 35 Z 44 1.. A e 14 i �co 0 0 1.7 53 A M3 77 8 41 47 Y 34 s S 8 24 '• GREGG CT °, ,. 3 45 '°' ISO 15 7d v I 140 33 R 52 23 ,r C s 3 46 4 o _ 8 a" 17140 $ 16 o:'° a 173 19 ,., 18 � _ H 4 I 32 48 51 Y 22 w s I a y a 180 19 $ OS W � I 'M � S ,M 21 Q�G 8 5 I 31 49 $ 50 `t, 20 0 10 r , 100 I � 11l• '1 `i 11 D^ 6 I I RION 30 CT rw s 3A ,z � 0 12 _ E 140 O LL Li ul F. Q "' Q 2 '� 13 7 o I ''' U LL a = Y 3 v 23 G m � � Q Z /yam �� ,� 14 ,., I m 117 lie 110 100 10{ 22 37 In ,,, g FOUR PEAKS FOUR PEAKS ,P SAN JACIr ft µ 48 DEV. INC. 21 10 DEV. INC. FOUR PEAKS 3 8 9 I 20 19 ,.o I rr DEV_ INC. 4 10 8 '� 134 124 $ I 1'1 i "^_ �� FOUR (� PEA N ¢ FOUR PEAKS TR 1D5 30. 1° � DEV. INC.1.0 o DEV. INC. 5.165 12 s I ., 3 , ,n 2 ,SOUThFIDGE LAIf&S ,m j I F.M. 1'709 3E TR 3G .9112"T TR I 13 t I TR a 3 I ' 1.797 AC I I sa I I 1. TR 3C 1.31 AC 'R 3C1- s .69 P.0 zv ADJACENT OWNERS TR 3C2 I AND ZONING 1.0 AC _^n. IN '31I /t0[iIt/[T O (£M£2ii 10-1) NVId 3is N31N30 300 HHlOS i I I } l m 2 15 - _ I P ES el v If �.1 fill, s: OEM co m �2 U LL 1 ' - - ----------------------- 15 i a J w rr W O 1P. n Q 1 J i3,a 0 : W jtgs$� IIi4:: VIty UI JuuttllaKe, lexa5 SITE PLAN REVIEW SUMMARY Case No.: ZA 99-066 Review No: Two Date of Review: 9/03/99 Project Name: Revised Site Plan - Southridge Executive Suites, Block 6, Lot 4R3R3, Southridge Lakes, Phase C-1 APPLICANT: Four Peaks Development 726 Commerce, Suite 109 Southlake, TX 76092 Phone : (817) 329-6996 Fax : (817) 481-4074 Attn: David McMahan ARCHITECT: Burson and Williams Architcets, Inc. 3888 Oak Lawn Suite 1505 Dallas, TX 75219 Phone: (214) 520-2221 Fax : (214) 528-6820 CITY STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE ABOVE REFERENCED PROJECT RECEIVED BY THE CITY ON 08/04/99 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. The purpose of this Revised Site Plan is to consider the addition of a carport. The scope of this review has been limited to only those issues raised by the proposed carport. All other aspects of this Site Plan are subject to the conditions of the previous approval. The following changes are required regarding the carport structure located along the east side of the property: a. Relocate the carport outside of the required 15' side setback. b. All structural support columns must be clad or constructed of a masonry material similar to the principal structure. Although labeled as such on the elevation plan, the interior columns appear to be shown as steel. The applicant should be aware that prior to issuance of a building permit a fully corrected site plan, along with any required 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, Perimeter Street Fee, Water & Sewer Impact and Tap Fees, and related Permit Fees. Denotes Informational Comment cc: Four Peaks Development; Burson and Williams Architcets, Inc. NACommunity Development\WP-FILES\REV\99\99066SP2.doc I 9D-5 I II I 4:064 ��1u'I e i. —m w"unx �. ,loovb nlmf ,nm �a�o R{ iwy a svm Or" S311f1S 3ALLn33)3 3DOWRLf10S 1 a F it a To uu rr ��rr0orrIr err gee �lu�00u - geegill 11 d� 0 IN U m z 0 L.j -i W 9 T z D 53 16-7 cn a) a) L.0 CX City of Southlake, Texas STAFF REPORT September 3, 1999 CASE NO: ZA 99-072 PROJECT: Revised Site Plan — The Courtyard at Timarron STAFF CONTACT: Dennis Killough, Senior Planner, 481-5581, ext. 787 REQUESTED ACTION: Revised Site Plan for The Courtyard at Timarron on property legally described as Lot 2, Hall Medlin No. 1038 Addition, an addition to the City of Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas; according to the plat recorded in Cabinet A, Slide 2495, Plat Records, Tarrant County, Texas, and being approximately 4.855 acres. PURPOSE: Site Plan approval is required prior to issuance of a building permit for the proposed carport. LOCATION: On the southeast corner of the intersection of East Continental Boulevard and South White Chapel Boulevard. OWNER: Chapel Monticello Partners, Ltd. APPLICANT: Realty Capital Corporation CURRENT ZONING: "S-P-1" Detailed Site Plan District with "0-1" Office District uses LAND USE CATEGORY: Office Commercial NO. NOTICES SENT: Eighteen (18) RESPONSES: Five (5) responses were received from within the 200' notification area: • Frank A. Ritz, PO Box, 1530 Colleyville, TX, in favor, "This will be a nice addition to an already `first class' development! Realty Capital continues to do a fine job!" (Received August 16, 1999.) • Barbara Manisco, 110 Bent Trail Drive, Southlake, TX, opposed. See attached letter. (Received August 17, 1999.) • Delores J. Webster, 100 Braddock Court, Southlake, TX, opposed, "The addition of 4 carports could lead to further requests for additional carports throughout the project." (Received August 19, 1999.) • Lois Weber, Director Timarron Homeowners Association, opposed. See attached letter. (Received August 19, 1999.) • Joe Kendall, P.O. Box 92998, Southlake, TX. See attached 1-1 City of Southlake, Texas letter. (Received August 19, 1999.) P&Z ACTION: August 19, 1999; Denied (7-0). STAFF COMMENTS: Attached is Site Plan Review Summary No. 2, dated August 13, 1999. NACOMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT\WP-FILES\MEMO\99CASES\99-072SP.DOC %-Z CITY OF SOUTHLAKE NOTICE TO INTERESTED PROPERTY OWNERS REFERENCE NO.: ZA 99-072 Dear Property Owner: An application has been filed with the City of Southlake Planning and Zoning Commission for a Revised Site Plan for The Courtyard at Timarron on property legally described as Lot 2, Hall Medlin No. 1038 Addition, an addition to the City of Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas; according to the plat recorded in Cabinet A, Slide 2495, Plat Records, Tarrant County, Texas, and being approximately 4.855 acres. This property is located on the southeast corner of the intersection of East Continental Boulevard and South White Chapel Boulevard. The request is being submitted by the Applicant, Realty Capital Corporation. The Owner of the property is Chapel Monticello Partners, Ltd. The current zoning is "S-P-I" Detailed Site Plan District with "O-1" Office District uses. A public hearing will be held by the City of Southlake Planning and Zoning Commission on Thursday, August 19, 1999 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 667 North Carroll Avenue, Southlake, Texas. At this time, you may submit your views on the matter in person, by writing, or by representative. You are encouraged to follow the requested action through final approval because changes are often made during the review process. If you know of any interested property owner who, for any reason, has not received a copy of this letter, it would be greatly appreciated if you would inform them of the time and place of this hearing. Very truly yours, Planning and Zoning Commission City of Southlake, Texas The following form may be filled out and mailed to the City of Southlake, Planning and Zoning Commission 1721 E. Southlake Blvd., Suite 100, Southlake, Texas, 76092. / ` � '• ./�� ' � � / ��_/./I ter. � �•��.rLMd �. �� .L� (Please Print Name ADDRESS: t V` PHONE: Ril'A� �'% —" f �) page I D 2 �E-3 REC'D AUG 171999 ZC :�' ,4e� . Za 3 Y�d-� 46V rft,64� me 2oE2 9 �-q KENDP' TEL NO.488-6812 Mau 10.3-2 9:48 P.01 IG C INI VINL I IWY 1 fUr1S7 TX rwr,a BUR 0171577-7050 fAULA STRINGER PAX (817) 577-1706 WESSITE wwwcb&w.can REALTOR3` To-Plunning sX 'Zoning Committee From -Lois Weber Sub j-cUluning change on southeast comer of White Chupel & Continental It is my understanding you would like to allow carport,Ls for offices on this site. 1 am on the board ofthe Timarron I lomeowncrs Association, plus I have been a Realtor in this area for over 15 years. Spuaking as a homeowner, I feel that the carports on that corner would not create the type of image we as Timarron residents want to convey to future residents. It is against the deed restrictions to allow carpurts in '1'imarr n and I feel those some restrictions should apply for the commercial area I also feel, as a Realtor, it will drop property values for the homes surrounding the. area. The commercial buildings are very upscale for the area and I believe it would be a costly mistake to add any kind of carport_ I m& Weber .I ifnarron IIomeowners Association Director C'oldwell Banker Residential Brokerage � U ; .. � 1999 RF,G'D Each Office Is (rldCtle &MY Owl W And OjwaaW. IE-5 Sunday, August 18, 1999 RE: ZA99-072 - Application for a Revised Site Plan (Applicant, Realty Capital Corporation, Owner Chapel Monticello Partners, Ltd.) Dear Planning and Zoning Commissioner, I write in opposition to the application to revise the site plan of the Courtyard at Timarron to allow installation of a carport. I am an adjacent property owner. The neighbors on my block oppose the revision. They are also adjacent property owners. Please feel free to contact them regarding this matter. Judy Airhart 150 Bent Trail Dr. 416-0635 Joe Kendall P. O. Box 92998 424-3339 Rich and Jeanne Bradshaw 130 Bent Trail Dr. 421-6590 Greg and Dana Trenor 120 Bent Trail Dr. 329-4922 Barbara Manisco 110 Bent Trail Dr. 329-4290 Ellen Schneider 100 Bent Trail Dr. 424-1027 Your packet shows " no responses received" within the 200' notification area. I received my notice on Saturday, August 7. No one else listed above had received anything as of Monday morning, August 9th. (Ms. Manisco said she received it either the following Thursday or Friday, the 12th or 13th. Friday is the day you guys received your packet.) If people did receive it early in the week, they had only 2-3 days to receive the notice, go to the post office to pick up the certified mail, inquire into the issue (since the notice gives no information as to what the proposed change is so you could decide whether you are for or against it), reply, allow mail time back to the city, and time for the city to process the info into your packets. This timing isn't reasonable. For those replies received "late" and tossed at you along with other papers before you start your meeting, I know it's hard to give them full consideration due to the situation. The notification process used here is not effective. I am one of the two homeowner directors of the Timarron Homeowner's Association and have been for the last three years. This request is asking for permission to allow a commercial user within our PUD to erect an edifice no homeowner within the PUD would ever be allowed to do. Shouldn't a commercial user in a PUD bear the same burdens and responsibilities as a homeowner in that PUD with regard to property appearance? Before this development was originally approved Richard Meyers met with most of the residents listed above and took into account their concerns. My wife even spoke on his behalf when it went before P&Z and City Council. But a deal is a deal.The neighborhood was in favor of the original site plan, which did not include a carport otherwise it would not have received their support. It is interesting that no one from Realty Capital Corp. has contacted anyone that I have talked to about this proposed revision. The simple reason why is they know it would be opposed and so there is no up in tipping everyone off. D Huu' i � 1999 �lE-1D Me ►oft I understand this is the 2nd request the City has received recently to modify site plans to add carports. I hope this is not the beginning of a trend. I know there is competition even within Southlake among those wishing to lease office space, but I do not think it is the City's responsibility to make their properties more marketable. Please help us. I am asking you to deny this request. Thank you for your consideration of this matter and for sacrificing your time to serve the City and people like me. Sincerely, -V4 Joe Kendall IE-`l Awe 2 D� 2 ,p y 1 / TRACT 5R2 ;3I 15 - 19 r 2.5819 O 17 td20 � n n DR YAU CT $ D A 4 a J� c. 5 ' 2 1 �� ..., le 21 n 22 21 lO I 23 a. J _ O sv ~ �/ Q? 2 z Q_ g a TRA R' TR A TR 1 B N COU , 1 C2A 217 / 246 2.0 AC SANDERS w "SF-1 A" "SF-1 A" CUSTOM 11 T 1 cn w 1190 ADAMS D. LONGMIRE s F-20A" BUILDERS 3 LANE INC CITY OF s - � SOUTHLAKE si 240 p mcc 0 W. EL FRANK RITZ 4 ° "R—PUD' CO, INC. .3'►=J 1 D. BOLTON 5 A� 0 ( TIMARRON OWNERS ASSN INC j 8R P. 2 10.187 WEBSTER .85 O 5 BRADDp "R—PUD" Cg C \ Y \ J 2 U "R—PUD" FLAHERTY MANISCO w o = > 2 c9� �cc W Y a m q ? DR M. SCHNEIDER BENT TR�L _ 9 D. _p4q 12 13 CaA CAMPANELLA 'R—PUD" 5 4 29 cr 8 v CT 1 a W 3 -a 5 " 31 O 3 28 19 2 9 18 15 W x z 32 Q 2 W 10 27 C1R 8R 33R I✓� ADJACENT OWNERS 34 9 25 16 'lE-q AND ZONING 25 NOMMUL IV Crdvxi m0i mu C M ISR-Oj AON W'J Jk-1 JP i 1 19 LL LLI 0j, '0 LLJ CL EL LU em qC-in LIN gm . VoRre Uiry oT 5outniue, Texas `W1 Case No.: ZA 99-072 SITE PLAN REVIEW SUMMARY Review No: Two Date of Review: 08/13/99 Project Name: Site Plan - The Courtyard at Timarron Ph. 1, being a portion of Lot 2 Hall Medlin No. 1038 Addition APPLICANT: Realty Capital Corporation 920 S. Main St. STE 170 Grapevine, TS 76051 Phone: (817) 488-4200 Fax: (817) 488-5257 Attn: Jimmy Archie ARCHITECT: CNK Associates Inc. 2045 N. Hwy. 360 STE 160 Grand Pairie, TX 75050 Phone: (817) 640-0100 Fax: (817) 633-3309 Attn: Billy Nguyen CITY STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE ABOVE REFERENCED PROJECT RECEIVED BY THE CITY ON 08/02/99 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 EDWARD AT (817) 481-5581, EXT. 880. General Development Standards Applies Comments Corridor Overlay Regulations N N/A Residential Adjacency Y See Comments No. 1 & 2 Building Articulation Y Complies Masonry Standards Y Complies Impervious Coverage Y Complies Bufferyards N/A No Change Interior Landscape N/A No Change Driveways N/A No Change This review is limited to the modifications proposed. Existing conditions that are unchanged or changes that do not have an impact on the site have not been evaluated. Provide a roof material in conformance with residential adjacency standards (Sec. 43.13b). Membrane roofs are not allowed as an acceptable material. (Variance Requested) 2. Relocate the proposed parking structure so that it is no closer than 40' from any single-family residential property line or redesign the structure such that no portion of the structure encroaches into an area above a 4:1 slope line extending from any single-family residential property. (Variance Requested) IF-11 UTY of 5outmake, Texas 3. Note the areas of future construction on the site plan. Such a label was included in the previous exhibit but appears to have been inadvertently dropped with this one. 4. The following changes are needed with regard to the Site Data Summary Chart a. Change the Land Use Designation to "Office Commercial". b. Correct the site coverage area and percentage to include the area incorporated by the carport. Site coverage includes both principal and accessory structures. * The Development Review Committee (DRC) has determined that this plan is sufficient for consideration by Planning and Zoning Commission. * The proposed site does not exceed the maximum permitted impervious coverage area percentage of 70% for the "C-2" Zoning District. The impervious coverage area percentage of this is approximately 43%. * Denotes Informational Comment cc: Realty Capital Corporation VIA FAX: (817) 488-5257 CNK Associates Inc. VIA FAX: (817) 633-3309 Chapel Monticello Partners, Ltd. VIA FAX: (817) 488-4200 Attn: Jimmy Archie L:\COMDEV\WP-FILESUIEWSPLAN-I.WPD I& 2 Im Mom M. 0 _ ISBN T _ - _ ♦ i , A� , ; of —MW o t if Z, 01 ill. 115*1 IV 1y; 9 1I.N. 1;114 y A ;�Ipj 11 '01 bf I � � td AES: [fill 9 b- -Is FROM : SUN PORTS INTERNATIONAL,Inc PHONE N0. : 2149059514 Aug. 02 1999 04:51PM P2 a IE-14 '1E_15 -_ _ City of Southlake, Texas MEMORANDUM September 3, 1999 TO: Billy Campbell, City Manager FROM: Chris Carpenter, Senior Comprehensive Planner SUBJECT: Ordinance No. 754, 1' Reading, Amendment to the City's Master Thoroughfare Plan, to provide for a connecting street between White Chapel Boulevard and North Peytonville Avenue Action Requested: To amend the currently adopted (3/4/97) Master Thoroughfare Plan (MTP) to incorporate the addition of a collector -level right-of-way in the vicinity of the Carroll ISD schools between White Chapel and Shady Oaks and the currently undeveloped area south of Coventry between Peytonville and Shady Oaks, as shown in "Exhibit A" attached to the ordinance. Background Information: As you may know, the text of the MTP notes that the thoroughfares represented in the plan show only existing roadway networks, with the note that the city may need future rights -of -way at various points between existing roadways where no thoroughfare currently exists on the MTP if development conditions warrant it. In this case, the city would prefer to address the need for potential new rights -of -way in undeveloped areas by actually amending the MTP to show a new thoroughfare. Amending the MTP to show a potential thoroughfare accomplishes at least two important objectives: (1) It serves as an advanced notice to property developers that there is a need to accommodate a new thoroughfare in their plans prior to the development of the property, and (2) it serves as an advanced notice to surrounding property owners and others of possible changes to circulation patterns in the subject area. Financial Considerations: There are no current financial issues to consider with this amendment. However, the right-of-way necessary for this collector, should it be constructed in the future, could be required to be dedicated at no cost to the city based on its inclusion in the MTP. Citizen Input/ Board Review: At their regular meeting of August 5, 1999, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of this item (5-0) with the additional recommendation that the City Council not consider this item until a citizens' meeting could be held. On August 26, 1999, a city-wide SPIN nAcommunity development\wp-files\projects\mtp-96\99_amendment ccl.doc any or souznme, texas meeting was held in the Senior Activity Center to address this issue. The meeting was well -attended (see sign -in sheet, attached), and residents voiced a variety of concerns, from the potential for cut -through traffic to negative impacts on existing homes and/or improvements in the large undeveloped areas. Councilpersons Debra Edmondson and Patsy Dupre were also in attendance and noted the concerns. Legal Review: The City Attorneys have been forwarded a copy of this memo and ordinance and are checking it as to form and legality. This item has been placed on your agenda in fulfillment of both the City Charter and Local Government Code requirements that state all master plans adoptions or amendments must move forward to the governing body (City Council) upon a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission. Alternatives: The alternative to amending the Master Thoroughfare Plan to show this collector street is to not amend the plan, with future development conditions dictating the need and location for access in the area. Supporting Documents: Staff Recommendation: SPIN sign -in sheet Ordinance No. 754, Amending the Master Thoroughfare Plan Exhibit "A" - Proposed General Location of Amendment Staff recommends approval of the MTP amendment for future right-of-way acquisition purposes as shown in Exhibit "A," and with the following note: The graphical representation of the proposed thoroughfare shown is intended to depict a general alignment based on generally expected development conditions. However, the precise alignment of any proposed thoroughfare is ultimately determined during development case processing prior to construction. Please do not hesitate to call me at Ext. 866 with any questions concerning this matter. CLC Appro;F7 ittal to City Council: City Manager's Office n:\community development\wp-files\projects\mtp-96\99_amendment ccl.doc g�� 1999 Neighborhood Meeting ,640A Report Form SPIN Neighborhood Meeting Date:. t S f Meetingis and Des�ri Topic phon. Featured Speaker(s): Attendance: 7q Location: 5��V' ( _ Follow Up Information Needed: !gnature ATTENDANCE FOR SPIN MTG, ON AUGUST 25, 1999 TOPIC: MASTER THOUROUGHFARE AMENDMENTS NAME ADDRESS PHONE 1421-8135 SPIN AREA M.L. Ottin er 1005 N. Pe onville 12 Pattt'Raia 2 1354 Istelta`VY Betty Runyon 979 Shady Oak 481-6447 10 J.L. Clow 820 Shady Oak 10 Virginia Clow 820 Shady Oak 481-2256 10 Gary Long 1205 N. Peytonville 329-5542 12 Cathy Karas 385 Ravenaux Dr. 11 Steve Freeman 113 Killdeer Ct. 416-9069 13 Ken and Tamara McMillan 1023 Mission 481-3350 10 Boyd Dollar 525 Brooks Ct. 491-2526 1 Barbara Dunlop 904 Raven Bend Ct. 488-7599 13 Bill Stone 1508 Pecos Dr. 421-1069 13 Mark Goodwin 585 N. Peytonville 329-3041 12 Gary Sparks 502 Fox Glenn 251-1923 11 Michael Boutte 716 Ashlei h Ln. 251-8112 9e .A� Larry Whisler 1201 Plantation Dr. 481-5316 12 Carl Capiska 1612 Heatherbrook 488-0482 5 Betty Dilday 1501 Coventry 416-2258 11 KathyThomas 1374 Lakeview 421-6944 12 Barbara Schlauch 1605 Mockingbird 416-0289 12 lWanda Buschman 11201 Post Oak Trail 488-7151 12 !Susan Ansley 1607 Loving Ct. 329 4514 13 `Al Radke 1602 Kings Ct. 251-7391 11 Nancy Jackson 1240 Post Oak Trail 481-1342 12 K 1401 Plantation Dr. Limond Grindstaff 424-3773 12 Davy Mo en 903 Turnbe 416-1157 11 James Hoglund 108 Killdeer 251-3681 13 Mike Hampshire 201 E. Chapel Downs 416-0866 10 Lisa Mlinac 923 Turnber 421-9879 11 Laine Hill 1601 Kings Ct. 251-1982 11 Karen Parales 924 Turnberry Ln, 329-7287 11 Denise Stringfellow 1605 Kings Ct. 329-8579 11 A Christian Henning 1220 Westmont Dr. 481-6163 8 Bar Gcodnot ' =sther Spickler !Shelia Finlay 1700 Shady Oak 926 Turnberry Ln. 908 Turnberry Ln. 329-4477 424-1105 421-2993 10 11 i 11 Jackie Phillips Deb Duval 1334 Woodbrook 916 Turnberry Ln. 481-9662 421-4073 12 11 Christina and Greg McCombs 915 Turnberry Ln. 251-8482 11 141ark Fidlie 912 Turnberry Ln. 481-4060 11 John MacFarlane Laurelwook Park Estates 214-770-3946 12 Jill O'Neal 101 Ascot 329-0952 10 Barbara Goer 1503 Covent 329-9399 11 Mary Ann Miltenberger 1604 New Castle Rd. 424-3604 Vicky Montgomery 1506 Coventry Ln. 481-5027 11 I Jean and Rick Buzzard 1500 Post Oak Tr. 488-1652 12 Bill Cook 1201 Bowie Ct. 251-1631 SWI Annette Borkowski 1201 Cypress Creek Circle 488-1479 12 Kris Weaver 1502 Covent 481-9856 11 Becky Miltenberger 1401 Excter Ct. 424-3930 11 Bernard Goer 1503 Covent 329-9399 11 Tom Morris Ki 403 St. Charles Ct. 37 m N.. 488-6650 14 1503 Norwich Ct. 329-3126 Sandy and David Sar ent 11 Jennie L. Bohart 440 W. Highland St. 421-0404 Lisa Stokd k 720 N. Peytonville 421-0414 13 Steve Moser 300 Lakeside Ct. 251-8981 8 i CTH resider>its Qk�s ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS PROVIDING FOR THE AMENDMENT OF THE ADOPTED MASTER THOROUGHFARE PLAN; PROVIDING THAT THIS ORDINANCE SHALL BE CUMULATIVE OF ALL ORDINANCES; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City of Southlake, Texas is a home rule city acting under its charter adopted by the electorate pursuant to Article XI, Section 5 of the Texas Constitution and Chapter 9 of the Local Government Code; and WHEREAS, Section 11.06 of the Southlake City Charter provides for the adoption and updating of a Comprehensive Master Plan and its components, including the Master Thoroughfare Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE,TEXAS: SECTION 1 Pursuant to Section 11.06 of the Southlake City Charter, the Comprehensive Master Plan, of which the Master Thoroughfare Plan is a component, may be submitted in whole or in part from time to time to the Council for their adoption, accompanied by a recommendation by the Planning and Zoning Commission, and shall contain a planning consideration for a period of at least ten (10) years. The proposed amendment to the Master Thoroughfare Plan is noted by graphical depiction in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. n:\community development\wp-files\projects\mtp-96\99_amendment ccl.doc 8�--� SECTION 2 The different elements of the Comprehensive Master Plan, as adopted and amended by the City Council from time to time, shall be kept on file in the office of the City Secretary of the City of Southlake, along with a copy of the minute order of the Council so adopting or approving same. Any existing element of the Comprehensive Master Plan which has been heretofore adopted by the City Council shall remain in full force and effect until amended by the City Council as provided herein. SECTION 3 This ordinance shall be cumulative of all provisions of ordinances of the City of Southlake, Texas, except where the provisions of this ordinance are in direct conflict with the provisions of such ordinances, in which event the conflicting provisions of such ordinances are hereby repealed. SECTION 4 It is hereby declared to be the intention of the City Council that the phrases, clauses, sentences, paragraphs and sections of this ordinance are severable, and if any phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph or section of this ordinance shall be declared unconstitutional by the valid judgment or decree of any court of competent jurisdiction, such unconstitutionality shall not affect any of the remaining phrases, clauses, sentences, paragraphs and sections of this ordinance, since the same would have been enacted by the City Council without the incorporation in this ordinance of any such unconstitutional phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph or section. SECTION 5 This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and publication as required by law, and it is so ordained. nAcotnmunity development\wp-files\projects\mtp-96\99_amendment ccl.doc PASSED AND APPROVED ON FIRST READING ON THIS DAY OF SEPTEMBER,1999. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY PASSED AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING ON THIS DAY OF SEPTEMBER,1999. APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: City Attorney Date: ADOPTED: EFFECTIVE: nAcommunity development\wp-files\projects\mtp-96\99_amendment ccl.doc MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY [m 1 Exhibit A: Area Map of Proposed Amendment 0 0 Proposed 64' R.O.W. Proposed 50' R.O.W. Existing 517 RO.W. Djrham I Carroll Junior High Elementary 11/ 1 2000 4111 Fjlj n:\community development\wp-files\projects\mtp-96\99 amendment ccl.doc N S E City of Southlake, Texas MEMORANDUM September 3, 1999 TO: Billy Campbell, City Manager FROM: Sharen Elam, Director of Finance SUBJECT: Ordinance No. 755, 1" reading, Tax Levy Ordinance Action Requested: Approval of Ordinance No. 755, on Pt reading, levying ad valorem taxes at the rate of $.422 for the Fiscal Year beginning October 1, 1999 and ending September 30, 2000. Background Information: The FY1999-00 budget as submitted to the City Council proposes a tax rate of $.422 per $100 of a property's taxable value. Part of the tax rate, $.13242 per $100, pays for the retirement of debt that is due during the 1999-00 budget year. The remainder of the tax rate, $.28958 per $100, is used to support General Fund operations of the City. State law requires the City to adopt the tax rate in these two components. On July 23, the Tarrant Appraisal District certified to City management the appraised values of all properties in Southlake. Total taxable value in the City is $2,201,350,761, which is the value of properties as of January 1, 1999. This does not include the Solana properties, which have been removed from the City's tax roll. Upon adoption of a tax rate upon the second reading, the City's tax collector, Tarrant County, will be notified of the adopted rate. Tarrant County has indicated that the City's tax rate information must be sent to them by September 23, 1999. Tarrant County will then apply the tax rate to the taxable values of properties in Southlake, and generate tax statements after October 1, 1999. Financial Considerations: Although the tax rate remains the same, if the ordinance is not approved, the existing tax rate and related split between maintenance and operations and debt service would remain in force until otherwise provided. The proposed split between M&O and debt service for FY1999-00 varies from the split for FY1998-99. Citizen Input/ Board Review: A Public Hearing is scheduled for September 21, 1999 with the 2nd reading of Ordinance No. 755. Legal Review: None required. Billy Campbell, City Manager Ordinance No. 755, Tax Levy Ordinance September 3, 1999 Page 2 Alternatives: In the absence of approving and adopting the ordinance, the existing tax rate and related split between maintenance and operations and debt service would remain in force until otherwise provided. Supporting Documents: Ordinance No. 755 Staff Recommendation: Approval of Ordinance No. 755, on V reading, levying ad valorem taxes at the rate of $.422 for the Fiscal Year beginning October 1, 1999 and ending September 30, 2000. Approved for Submittal to City Council: Ci Manager's Office ORDINANCE NO. 755 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS, FIXING AND LEVYING MUNICIPAL AD VALOREM TAXES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING OCTOBER 1, 1999 AND ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2000, AND FOR EACH YEAR THEREAFTER UNTIL OTHERWISE PROVIDED, AT THE RATE OF $0.422 PER ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS ($100.00) ASSESSED VALUE ON ALL TAXABLE PROPERTY WITHIN THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS, AS OF JANUARY 1, 1999, TO PROVIDE REVENUES FOR THE PAYMENT OF CURRENT EXPENSES AND TO PROVIDE AN INTEREST AND SLAKING FUND ON ALL OUTSTANDING DEBTS OF THE CITY; DIRECTING THE ASSESSMENT THEREOF; PROVIDING FOR DUE AND DELINQUENT DATES TOGETHER WITH PENALTIES AND INTEREST THEREON; PROVIDING FOR PLACE OF PAYMENT; PROVIDING FOR APPROVAL OF THE TAX ROLLS PRESENTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL; PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF INCONSISTENT ORDINANCES; PROVIDING FOR A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE: AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Southlake, Texas (hereinafter referred to as the "City") hereby finds that the tax for the fiscal year beginning October 1, 1999, and ending September 30, 2000, hereinafter levied for current expenses of the City and the general improvements of the City and its property must be levied to provide the revenue requirements of the budget for the ensuing year; and WHEREAS, the City Council has approved, by a separate ordinance adopted on the 7' day of September, 1999, the budget for the fiscal year beginning October 1, 1999, and ending September 30, 2000; and WHEREAS, all statutory and constitutional requirements concerning the levying and assessing of ad valorem taxes have been complied with. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS: Section 1. That all of the above premises are found to be true and correct and are incorporated into the body of this Ordinance as if copied in their entirety. Section 2. That there is hereby levied and ordered to be assessed and collected for the fiscal year beginning October 1, 1999, and ending September 30, 2000, and for each fiscal year thereafter until it be otherwise provided by and ordained on all taxable property, real, personal and mixed, situated within the corporate limits of the City of Southlake, Texas, and not exempt from taxation by the Constitution of the State and valid State laws, an ad valorem tax rate of $0.422 for the general operations of the City on each One Hundred Dollars ($100.00) assessed value of taxable property, and shall be apportioned and distributed as follows: Ordinance No. 755 Page 2 a. For the purpose of defraying the current expenses of the municipal government of the City; a tax of $0.28958 on each One Hundred Dollars ($100.00) assessed value of all taxable property. b. For the purpose of creating a sinking fund to pay the interest and principal on all outstanding debt of the City, not otherwise provided for, a tax of $0.13242 on each one Hundred Dollars ($100.00) assessed value of all taxable property, within the City which shall be applied to the payment of such interest and maturities of all outstanding debt. Section 3. That all ad valorem taxes shall become due and payable on December 31, 1999, and all ad valorem taxes for the year shall become delinquent after January 31, 2000. There shall be no discount for payment of taxes prior to said January 31, 2000. A delinquent tax shall incur all penalty and interest authorized by State law Section 33.01 of the Property Tax Code, to -wit: a penalty of six percent (6%) of the amount of the tax for the first calendar month it is delinquent plus one percent (1 %) for each additional month or portion of a momil Lhe tax remains unpaid prior to July 1 st of the year in which it becomes delinquent. Provided, however, a tax delinquent by July 1st incurs a total penalty of twelve percent (12%) of the amount of the delinquent tax without regard to the number of months the tax has been delinquent. A delinquent tax shall also accrue interest at a rate of one percent (1 %) for each month or portion of a month the tax remains unpaid. Taxes that remain delinquent on July 1, 2000, incur an additional penalty of fifteen percent (15%) of the amount of taxes, penalty and interest due; such additional penalty is to defray costs of collection due to contract with the City's attorney pursuant to Section 6.30 of the Property Tax Code. Section 4. Taxes are payable at the office of Tarrant County Tax Collector. The City shall have available all rights and remedies provided by law for the enforcement of the collection of taxes levied under this ordinance. Section 5. That the tax rolls, as presented to the City Council, together with any supplement thereto, be, and the same are hereby approved. Section 6. That any and all ordinances, resolutions, rules, regulations, policies or provisions inconsistent or in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby expressly repealed and rescinded to the extent of the inconsistency or conflict. Section 7. If any section, article, paragraph, sentence, clause, phrase or word in this Ordinance, or application thereto any person or circumstances is held invalid or unconstitutional by a Court of competent jurisdiction, such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance; and the City Council hereby declares it would have passed such remaining portions of this Ordinance despite such invalidity, which remaining portions shall remain in full force and effect. Ordinance No. 755 Page 3 X Section 8. That the necessity of and levying municipal ad valorem taxes of the City for the next fiscal year as required by the laws of the State of Texas, requires that this Ordinance shall take effect immediately from and after its passage, and it is accordingly so ordained. PASSED AND APPROVED on first reading this day of 1999. Rick Stacy, Mayor ATTEST: Sandra LeGrand City Secretary PASSED AND APPROVED on second reading this 1999. ATTEST: Sandra LeGrand City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney Date: Adopted: Effective: M.\ WD-FILESIORDINA.'JC,'WTAX-ORD.DOCAcb day of , Rick Stacy, Mayor 4 City of Southlake, Texas STAFF REPORT September 3, 1999 CASE NO: ZA 99-070 PROJECT: Plat Revision - Proposed Lots 511 and 6R, A A Freeman No. 522 Addition STAFF CONTACT: Dennis Killough, Senior Planner, 481-5581, ext. 787 REQUESTED ACTION: Plat Revision for proposed Lots 5R and 6R, A. A. Freeman No. 522 Addition, on property legally described as Lots 5 and 6, A. A. Freeman No. 522 Addition, an addition to the City of Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas, according to the plat recorded in Cabinet A, Slide 4812, Plat Records, Tarrant County, Texas, and being approximately 3.250 acres. PURPOSE: Abandon a dedicated Common Access Easement between the two lots. LOCATION: On the west side of Southridge Lakes Parkway across from the intersection of Southridge Lakes Parkway and Travis Court. OWNERS: Dan Light and Kirk Lundblade. APPLICANT: Area Surveying CURRENT ZONING: "SF -IA" Single Family Residential District LAND USE CATEGORY: Medium Density Residential NO. NOTICES SENT: Three (3) RESPONSES: None P&Z ACTION: August 19, 1999; Approved (7-0) subject to Plat Review Summary No. 2, dated August 13, 1999. STAFF COMMENTS: Attached is Plat Review Summary No. 2 dated August 13, 1999. NACOMMUNITY DEVELOPMENnWP-FILES\MEMO\99CASES\99-070PR.DOC OL I - ' 12R 13 14 9 E �47we` I 2tr �I y 11R 2 SAN AUGUSTINEZCT BL1v n ,� 12 A O J 1 OR KLa 336 N 20� V* T5R R 7 1 1 m ,m uo Ix = BOWIE CT lzoo ,,. es Is � • 9 n 140 _TR2C1D1A 076 F. JOYCE, --,, "SF-1 All - 90 j- 91 w CONCHO CT a 87R m s • 86 , 4i T 0 85 s 'M 47 84 46 83 A45 40 PECOS DR ADJACENT OWNERS AND ZONING 3 �1 I 9r-1 w� 9 53- I. 134 21.33 1206 Brazos Drive Southlake, TX 76092-6021 (817) office (481-7717 home 481-7654 mobile 909-0001 fax 329-1702 July 12, 1999 Keith Martin, Landscape Administrator CITY OF SOUTHLAKE 667 North Carroll Avenue Southlake, TX 76092 Dear Keith, I wanted to give you the latest developments regarding my 3.25-acre, two -lot development on SouthRidge Lakes Blvd. As you know, in order to preserve trees, I planned a common driveway that would serve both lots. Initially the easement was to be fifteen feet on each lot with the driveway utilizing Lots 5 & 6 equally. As we progressed from planning to implementation, location of the trees made it impossible to do that. The driveway had to located completely on Lot 5. Kirk and Diane Lundblade purchased Lot 5, and I am building their home. They feel that due to the location of the trees, a shared driveway is not reasonable. I understand their point of view, as -well as their concern. The easement ended up only 2 '/2 feet from their garage door, and I didn't consider all of the ramifications of this situation. Since the lots are over 150 feet wide, they feel that sharing a driveway is unnecessary and would be detrimental to the value of their property. After thinking about the ramifications of having a common driveway, particularly on lots that are half again as wide as other lots in the area, it is reasonable to eliminate the common access idea. I have instructed Area Survey and John Levett to proceed with the City on this request. Sincerely Yours, ROOD J U L 2 21999 Dan R. Light, President TA b6< ! YReX^ Wag l 4 Aai i I-jh 1 ye� p.{ h• /y; 1 " W � • w . e 1 eel .7. o•�u�i+-..� � a'.d�. �a v v i„ � IJ Y � ##� •I W o_ oin C ° IF 7 o w OR ^ o ° WU� NO tl _ .„" I �o Zi .Ie we WU 0 I I Of'f[I 01 ++o v w� i .t ri h r M 011100V e0QA O.f X . s� Mkis psij, C! A BC-5 Q �w .cp� •� � � r b City of Southlake, Texas Case No: ZA 99-070 PLAT REVIEW SUMMARY Review No: Two Date of Review: 08/13/99 Project Name: Plat Revision — Lots 5R & 6R, A. A. Freeman No. 522 Addition, being a revision of Lots 5 & 6, A. A. Freeman No. 522 Addition, being 3.25 acres out of the A. A. Freeman Survey APPLICANT: Dan Light Kirk Lundblade 1206 Brazos DR. 2400 State Hwy 121 Apartment # 2706 Southlake, TX 76092 Eulass, TX 76039 Phone: (817) 481-7654 (817) 355-0146 Fax: (817) 329-1702 (817) 877-1709 SURVEYOR: Area Surveying 102 W. Trammell St. Ft. Worth, TX 76140 Phone: (817) 293-5684 Fax: (817) 293-5685 Attn: Rodger Hart CITY STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE ABOVE REFERENCED PROJECT RECEIVED BY THE CITY ON 08/02/99 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 EDWARD S. MCROY AT (817) 481-5581, EXT. 880. A "Certificate of Taxes Paid" from each taxing authority for each shown lot must be provided to the city prior to filing this plat in the county records. Original signatures and seals will be required on three blackline mylars prior to filing the plat. Also required are two sets of owner's dedications and notaries (8.5" x 11" 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. This Development Review Committee has determined that this pre -submittal is sufficient for consideration by the Planning and Zoning Committee. Denotes Informational Comment cc: Dan Light VIA FAX: ABOVE Kirk Lundblade VIA FAX: ABOVE Area Surveying VIA FAX: ABOVE \\SLKSV4001\Loca1\Community Development\WP-FILES\REV\99\99070PR2 Lot 5R & 6R AA fREEMAN nO 522 ADDN. .Doc 1 %,ity of aouiniaKe, i exas Case No. 99-070 Review No. One Dated: 7 — 22 - 99 Number of Pages: 1 Project Name: Lots 5R and 6R, A. A. Freeman No. 522 Addition (Plat Revision Contact: Keith Martin, Landscape Administrator Phone: (817) 481-5581, x 848 Fax: 817) 421-2175 The following comments are based on the review of plans received on 07 - 12 - 99 . Comments designated with a (#) symbol may be incorporated into the formal review to be considered by either the Planning and Zoning Commission or City Council. Other items will not be addressed by either the P&Z or City Council. It is the applicant's responsibility to contact the department representative shown above and make modifications as required by the comment. * No comments. BUILDING INSPECTIONS p/7 ou, City of Southlake, Texas 01 STAFF REPORT September 3, 1999 CASE NO: ZA 99-073 PROJECT: Plat Revision - Proposed Lot 6R, Aubrey Estates STAFF CONTACT: Demos Killough, Senior Planner, 481-5581, ext. 787 REQUESTED ACTION: Plat Revision for proposed Lot 6R, Aubrey Estates, on property legally described as Lots 6 and 7, Aubrey Estates, an addition to the City of Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas, according to the plat recorded in Cabinet A, Slide 4514, Plat Records, Tarrant County, Texas, and being approximately 3.003 acres. PURPOSE: Combine two lots to create a larger buildable area and abandon a utility easement. LOCATION: On the east side of South White Chapel Boulevard approximately 400' south of the intersection of South White Chapel Boulevard and Pine Drive. OWNER: Todd Tracy APPLICANT: Kenny Anderson Construction CURRENT ZONING: "SF -IA" Single Family Residential District LAND USE CATEGORY: Low Density Residential NO. NOTICES SENT: Five (5) RESPONSES: One (1) notice was received from within the 200' notification area: • Satasha Tolbert, 475 South White Chapel Boulevard, in favor, "as long as it doesn't affect our property we are not worried about what goes on. Good luck to them. Hope it looks great!" (Received August 23, 1999.) P&Z ACTION: August 19, 1999; Approved (7-0) subject to Plat Review Summary No. 2, dated August 13, 1999, deleting Item #1 (double fronted residential lots not be allowed). STAFF COMMENTS: Attached is Plat Review Summary No. 2, dated August 13, 1999. id:\CommuWity Development\WP-FILES\MEMO\99CASES\99-073PR.doc i ,GQ 67, TR 3L 8.31 AC ,oso TR 3N TR.3C 13.11 Ac �066�1 �JER� 1 MET " I CE 200 1 8 I 1 RRY 1 K G 58NaADDN 30 4 I E 1 N° �596A 244 CMApEL T I TR 3M �,MODI S k 1.0 AC le E frDCl1 I R 3D1 G"HUly I b, 1.0 AC � 1 Pig / TR 3D .98 AC R A 5 I 3.01 ® 4p 1 s TR 9.5 CAS S 1 TI R ,.SF-1 A" : 2 1.26 ® g TR 5H 1. ® .59 ® s 240 TR 3K R. A. SMITH 2.5 AC SMITH TR 2A1C 1.0 AC g H TR 2A1 ros FREEHLING 4R28 1.93 AC 377 ,96 48 3 /1 8 TR 2AtA $ REA. SMITH f r 3 AC A" ,SF-1 A" 2R1 A. TOLBERT Z sAC 8 4R2A a G A 2.436 AC 2 A %i GJg� 2R .� INS v P PINE CT E PINE ACRES C 4R1 32°�� TR 2A 3 957 0 3 TR 381 1.0 AC .v F717 4` 174 75 ADJACENT OWNERS BERRY AND ZONING 1.2211ID c'm DITI�N 3 ` 1(01GH, - 0 1 Ali. A g� I .,OVE FROM : KENNY ANDERSON CONST FAX NO. : 817 498 2230 Aug. 13 1999 02:31PM P1 KEl\TNY ANDERSoN CONSTRUCTION ATT: Ed McRoy To: City of Southlake - PNZ Re: Plat Revision- Lot 6R Aubrey Estates I would like to request a variance on the Plat revision to have driveway entrance & Egress to S. White Chapel. We will have no driveway access to Pine Street. We will construct 8' Privacy Fencing along Pine Street. Thanks, Kenny PNZ 786 RECD Nu a 131999 1201 Sporgercrest - Bedford, TX 76021 - Office/Fox: 817-498-2230 • Pager: 817-671-1724 W4 Maki and Associates, Inc. 3521 W. Pioneer Parkway, Suite E Arlington, Texas 76013 (817) 274-6883 City of Southlake July 28, 1999 667 N. Carroll Avenue Southlake, Texas 76092 To: Edward S. McRoy RE: Case No. 99-073, Plat Revision, Lot 6R, Aubrey Estates This letter is in regards to the comments from the DRC meeting I received via fax on July 26, 1999. To the best of my knowledge I have addressed all the comments except for Item 9 (c) and (d), the on the ground survey that was performed did not include establishing the Westerly right of way of White Chapel Boulevard or the Easterly right of way of Pine Drive. Since this was a revision of two existing lots, and right of way had already been dedicated on the plat recorded in Cabinet A, Slide 4514. Therefore it is my request that the requirement to show distances across full width R.O.W. for S. White Chapel Blvd., and Pine Drive, be waived. And the requirement to dimension centerlines with bearings be waived. Thank You Richard C. Maki, RPLS RECD J U L 2 91999 ,',1 ;11j !rIn i !i'{i11 Ila p" 'u I Lit k.�: 5. t{}( �. i j} i t � i 1!. - � !f •1j !+ ii '! i i� i igli � i`a S 3 i ``■t' 3�7 f. si_ i. ,i i ie I i;l� i �; i3tl {S {�� {:i {S; {1j.'� s: {f�-1j {f (j � ii � �►o;' d r °•SO iI i�. i • ff r ;,; !•j i +, W +ti a-i :r , �','i 01 li, .I- •II -,Sia 'i ' f ' rat r !2 ''� ■i ' ■} +• ■• ri J 1 ;►!1{;+;ii;_;fIptiM�j;#�!yif;,1 jiSf;i pill+! F;{311a M PSI Id fit �!; is Ills y g ft' O 4c " N ca�i W � � m�� i� ��jE V ? t � �- � ■ R � a■� Jj op oI 5 Z _O w Er Q J W 0 Q a- CL Q J D O w !z OL city of 5outhlake, Texas Case No: ZA 99-073 PLAT REVIEW SUMMARY Review No: Two Date of Review: 08/13/99 Project Name: Plat Revision -Lot 6R Aubrey Estates, being a revision of lots 6 & 7, Aubrey Estates, being 3.003 acres out of the H. Granberry Survey, Abstract No 581 APPLICANT: Kenny Anderson Construction 1201 Spargercrest Bedford, TX 76021 Phone: (817) 498-2230 Fax: (817) 498-2230 Attn: Kenny Anderson SURVEYOR: Maki and Associates, Inc. 3521 W. Pioneer Parkway, Suite E Arlington, TX 76013 Phone: (817) 274-6883 Fax: (817) 261-8223 Attn: Richard Maki CITY STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE ABOVE REFERENCED PROJECT RECEIVED BY THE CITY ON 07/29/99 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 EDWARD MCROY AT (817) 481-5581, EXT. 880. Double fronted residential lots shall not be allowed. Lots that back to an arterial street however, may be approved when no there is no access allowed from such lots to the arterial street (Subdivision Ordinance Section 8.01C). South White Chapel Blvd. is designated as an A5U arterial street on the Master Thoroughfare Plan. If it is the intention for this lot to back to S. White Chapel Blvd, add the note below to the face of the plat. Please note that a lotting pattern has been established with adjacent lots fronting on White Chapel. "No lot within this addition shall be allowed driveway access onto S. White Chapel Blvd. " 2. The following changes are required with regard to surrounding properties shown: a. Label the White Chapel United Methodist Church property as "Lot 1, Block A White Chapel Methodist Church Addn." and note the filing information (Vol. 388-204 Pg. 12). Remove deed information from the site. Finally, add the words "Approved Site Plan". b. Correct the orientation of the tract lines for the properties located along the west side of S. White Chapel Blvd. These lines should be shown running to the west rather than to the north. C. Correct the east R.O.W. line of S. White Chapel Blvd along the shown Lot 2, Aubrey Estates. The R.O.W. Line should be approximately 5' interior to the existing street. Dimension the distance across the full width of the R.O.W. from the property boundary corners for both S. White Chapel Blvd. and Pine Drive The Development Review Committee has determined that this pre -submittal is sufficient for consideration by the Planning and Zoning Commission. Uty of 5outhlake, Texas 31 * Please submit a revised blueline "check print" prior to submitting blackline mylars with original signatures. * Original signatures and seals will be required three blackline mylars prior to filing the plat. Also required are two sets of owner's dedications and notaries (8.5" x 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. * A Developers Agreement is required prior to construction of any public infrastructure. The Developer's Agreement for this addition should consider streets, drainage, park dedication requirements and fees, off -site sewer extensions, off -site drainage and utility easements and impact fees. * Denotes Informational Comment att: Lienholder Statement cc: Kenny Anderson Construction VIA FAX: ABOVE Maki and Associates, Inc. VIA FAX: ABOVE Todd Tracy VIA FAX: (972) 387-2205 \\SLKS V0001 \SHARED\ComDev\WP-FILES\REV\#PLATS-5.doc M. 2 s!s¢ sFs$FO 5 ;g_i $$€j Y a, = ifs•§, x y$ Y6 +y7i l s j •3 gg BO.E Edfsj E^$i ^,: gss Ee'=gEi y!fi"fia � t��=..:i iJ� eV�ay E°ti _ +q°� � E° j {♦ s p Y^sSY 6°gii =,'6is _6P°�` x�d• Y^'5 i Re° 9X t _a -',i 6sE�Y `aa�eSQ65$ g$aa 'R=!'66efi"6$ia gd`F§ 7 �• ty °-;Y �$��s �$�� I$�YY� �C�� `� ��a= �$S�a$p 8� `$F�� as P ��{Y, ;I � � � a, �7 :i 55ii ails i_� Y°_ a° z �° a- $ e tt r by j• 's xE m Ea�<f EHs EaE:$6E#='A 2l'$afi F$ aa.$F a il � i a 7 7 7� � ➢, a ' s g ;°�6EF7; r� fill gg i 1, SF^J6'ii X0 1 a I I � Y tC I I Ejjj ]7 Qj_ yc � y �I � n City of Southlake, Texas MEMORANDUM September 3, 1999 TO: Billy Campbell, City Manager FROM: Shawn Poe, Senior Civil Engineer SUBJECT: Approval of Resolution 99-69 authorizing the City Attorney to bring a condemnation action for the purpose of obtaining a permanent water line easement and temporary construction easement for use by the City for the construction of a 24" water line Action Requested: Approve Resolution 99-69 authorizing the City Attorney to bring a condemnation action for the purpose of obtaining a permanent water line easement and temporary construction easement for use by the City for the construction of a 24" water line. Background Information: The City is in the process of acquiring several easements in order to construct a 24" water line along SH 114. The water line will feed the pump station on T.W. King that is currently under construction. The water line will extend from Trophy Club along the south side of SH 114 to the pump station (see exhibit 1). The City has made several attempts to acquire the easement from the property owner, Ms. Rhonda Decker - Chandler, to no avail. Financial Considerations: The City had the property appraised. The appraised value of the permanent and temporary easement is $17,250. Therefore, the City offered Ms. Decker -Chandler $17,250 for the water line easement and temporary construction easement. Additionally, if the condemnation action proceeds to the Commissioner's Court, the City will incur attorney's fees and possible consulting fees from the appraiser, engineer, etc. Citizen Input/ Board Review: None Legal Review: The attorneys representing the City recommend approval of a resolution to proceed with all condemnation actions. Alternatives: The City has exhausted all efforts to obtain the water line easement and staff recommends proceeding with the condemnation action. Supporting Documents: Exhibit 1 9A - 1 City of Southlake, Texas Resolution 99-69 Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends City Council approve Resolution 99-69 authorizing the City Attorney to bring a condemnation action for the purpose of obtaining a permanent water line easement and temporary construction easement for use by the City for the construction of a 24" water line. Please place this item on the September 7, 1999 Regular City Council Agenda for review and consideration. SEP/sep Approved for Submittal to City Council: 6-( City Manager's Office 9A - 2 m EXHIBIT 1 n I w 0 i Q o 0 w J Z O U � z W Z I�-WZ Lj- Q- UO Q _jCf) �72w ODF-- Cf)0- � Z 0 L d Nil iONl01dd t— F Q� ydOcyl w O Cif J y 0 m0�_ Z ��c = W I / � U 0 cr a W � 7 l illll'Il 9A-3 %''I r n�4 �4 c)nii i 4 n RESOLUTION NO.99-69 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS AUTHORIZING THE CITY ATTORNEY TO BRING A CONDEMNATION ACTION FOR THE PURPOSE OF OBTAINING A PERMANENT WATER LINE EASEMENT AND TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT FOR USE BY THE CITY FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 24" WATER LINE OR FOR OTHER PUBLIC PURPOSES PERMITTED BY LAW WHEREAS, the City of Southlake is in the process of constructing a 24" water line as part of the City's water system, (the "Project") which will serve existing and future developments in the city,' and WHEREAS, in order to complete construction of the Project, it is necessary for the city to acquire easements from property owners who own land across which the Project will be located; and WHEREAS, the city and the owner of one of said properties, Rhonda Decker -Chandler of Dallas, have been unable to reach an agreement on the acquisition of this easement; and WHEREAS, the city council now deems it necessary to authorize the city attorney to initiate condemnation proceedings in order to acquire the necessary easement TEXAS: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, SECTION 1. The city attorney is hereby authorized to bring a condemnation lawsuit for the purpose of acquiring a 20' wide permanent water line easement and a temporary construction easement, being more particulady described on the exhibit attached hereto. SECTION 2. The city council finds that such acquisition in this condemnation action is necessary in order to serve the public health, safety and welfare. PASSED, APPROVED and EFFECTIVE this day of 1999. Mayor, City of Southlake 1lslksv40011spoe$\wd-fileslciplwaterldecker condemnation resclution.doc sce 1 9A-4 ATTEST: City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: City Attorney \\slksv4OOl\spoe$\wd-files\cip\water\decker condemnation resolution doc Page 2 9A-5 TEL No. Aug 31,99 15:26 P.04 THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE PERMANENT WATER LINE EASEMENT THE STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF TARRANT KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That 1, Rhonda Decker -Chandler, for and in consideration of the stun of Seventeen Thousand Two Hundred Fifty ($17,250.00) Dollars and other good and valuable consideration in hand paid by Grantee herein, the receipt and sttffcicncy of which is hereby acknowledged and confessed, have granted, sold and conveyed. and by these presents do grant, sell and convey to the City of Southlake, Grantee herein, of Tarrant County, Texas a pernnanenl and perpetual Easement for the purpose of installing, repairing, maintaining, altering, replacing, relocating, and operating utilities in, into, upon, across And under that land in Tarrant County, Teas described as follows, to -wit: Being a Pennanent Water Line Easement, described as follows: Sec attached E.xlribit `A' for graphic depiction See attached Exhibit 'B' for metes and bounds description. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the above described casement, together with all and singular, the rights and appurteratrtces thereto, anywise belonging unto the said Grantee, its successors and assigns forever: and We do hereby certify that We are the owners of the property described herein and bind ourselves, our heirs and assigns, to warrant and to forever defend all and singular the premises unto the said Grantee, its successors and assigns, against every person whomsoever lawfully claiming or to claim same or any thereof. EXECUTED this the day of , 1999 Rhonda Decker -Chandler BEFORE NIE, the undersiglred authority, on this day personally appeared Rhonda Decker -Chandler known to inc to be the persons whose ttarrte is subscribed to the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged to me that she executed the same for the purpose and consideration therein expressed. GIVEN under my hand and seal of office on this tits _ day of , 1999. Notary Public in and for the State of Texas My commission expires: 9A-6 TEL No. :C_:26 P . 0 5 EZHISIT "A" LEGAL DZBCRIPTION PEST MTEA LIFE SM30C 1T BEING a 20 foot wide strip of land located in the W. PEA SURVEY, Abstract No. 1045, Denton County, Texas, and crossing the tract of land conveyed to Rhonda C. Decker -Chandler, by the deed recorded in Volume 1139, Page 580 of the Deed Records of Denton County, Texas. Said 20 foot wide strip of land being more particularly described by metes and bounds, as follows: BEGINNING at a point in the East right-of-way line of Precinct Line Road, and located at a point lying S 02° 34' 03" W 31.26 feet, from the intersection of the East right-of-way line of said Precinct Line Road with the Southwest right-of-way line of State Highway NO. 114; THENCE S 890 01' 43" E 41.72 feet, to a point; THENCE S 66. 54' 07" E 222.00 feet, to a point in the East boundary line of said Decker -Chandler Tract; THENCE S 009 31' 14" E 21.83 feet, along the East boundary line of said Decker -Chandler Tract to a point; THENCE N 669 54' 07" W 226.84 feet, to a point; THENCE N 899 01' 43" W 38.37 feet, to a point in the East right- of-way line of aforesaid Precinct Line Road; THENCE N 020 34' 03" E, 20.01 feet, along the East right-of-way line of said Precinct Line Road to mug PLACE OF BEGINNINn containing 5,289 square feet of land. EASEMENT NO. 2 9A-7 ND EXHIBIT 8 EASEMENT AREA PERMANENT EASEMENT — 5,289 SQ. FT. TEMP. EASEMENT No.1 = 6.452 SQ. FT. TEMP. EASEMENT No.2 = 9,812 SO. FT. f! I J N� 0 G� Bltl'P AO t COAMPM Um Amwtim . ,QF9P.r4W 7 PaLL N. 7�177 OWN rI r, • qt Rir ..A N1M V~ rsT yn+. 71III+ nin J I 1 I I 20.01, OINNIMG PKIMI004T EASEMENT N _1__. ,,,tom � � t .2a• , 4 o I to W I z SURVEM ON TFm amom I AUtiUBT lb, 1907 n I n 1 n C9 tAJ �z jMINISNO� l7oNuu. W. PEA SURVEY d LAW No. 1074 ABSTRACT No.1045 t I \ DENTON COUNTY I OF �r:G�ST 35.27' JAMES L. BRITTAIN � � 3• s�4 ► zta�' sutra I � I MW—m PvwsE Ado NI 1 K. 120 ' DAT.C.T. PERMANENT WATER LINE EASEMENT AND "EMPORY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENTS 9A-8 TEL No. Aug 31,99 15:28 P.07 A Accepted by the City of Southlake, this the day of , A.D. 1999, By: The City of Souftikc, Texas RETURN DOCUMENTS TO: GRANTOR GRANTEE City of Southlakc % Sandra LcGrdnd City Secretary 1725 E. Southlakc Blvd. Southlake, TX 76092 9A-9 i- City of Southlake, Texas MEMORANDUM September 3, 1999 To: Billy Campbell, City Manager From: Charlie Thomas, City Engineer Subject: Coventry Manor Addition — Traffic Calming Action Requested: Consider approving the installation of "raised cobblestone strips" in the Coventry Manor Addition. Background Information: For several months, the City staff has been working with the homeowners in Coventry Manor Addition regarding "traffic control devices". After the City staff met with the homeowners, a study of possible traffic cahnir_a devices such as speed humps and landscaped islands was done by the City staff. This was then presented to the homeowners. The homeowners had two traffic concerns. One was speeding and the other was cut -through traffic. The homeowners determined that they did not want speed humps and the landscaped islands would not allow the Fire Department adequate space to set up the equipment for fighting fires; therefore, the islands were disregarded. The homeowners submitted a petition requesting "raised cobblestone strips" (that they had seen in other subdivisions). They also asked for increased enforcement of the speed limit in their neighborhood. The Public Safety Department has been doing increased patrol in the neighborhood and that has had a definite impact when the patrols were present. The City staff has investigated the "raised cobblestone strips" suggested by the homeowners. It is a strip of "stamped concrete" ten -feet wide placed across the street. The strip is raised approximately 1-1/2 inches above the pavement which is only half as high as normal speed humps. The strips definitely get the 10A-1 r Financial Considerations: Citizen Input/ Board Review: Legal Review: drivers attention and is a good reminder to the driver to be aware of their speed. The strips are aesthetically pleasing and are not nearly as intrusive as speed humps. It is the City staff's opinion that the raised strips could be effective in making drivers more conscious of their speed without being a nuisance in the neighborhood. It is my opinion that the raised strips would have no impact on cut -through traffic. The City staff has identified the need for at least three locations. Prior to installation of the raised strips, the Homeowner's Association should approve the locations recommended by the City staff. The cost of the raised cobblestone strips is estimated by an area contractor to be approximately $4,700 per strip. This includes removal of existing pavement and construction of the raised cobblestone strip. Funding could come from unused CIP funds or be budgeted in the 99/00 budget for street maintenance. Homeowners of Coventry Manor have submitted a petition requesting the raised cobblestone strips. None. Alternatives: Approve the installation of raised cobblestone strips or disapprove the installation. Approve the City paying 100 % of the cost or require the Homeowner's Association to pay for a portion of the cost. Supporting Documents: Map Exhibit Pictures 1OA-2 r N Staff Recommendation: Place this request on the September 7, 1999 Council agenda for Council consideration and approval. Charlie J. Thomas City Engineer Approved for Submittal to City Council: City Manager's Office 10A-3 A Mnanito cast -in -place: archiwctural concretc rovitig is dw peA,,{t p'l.,ing rithation far all your imuiuillal priiimis. Witib 2.55, '.Itit[ILlanl colors duJ RIUM thall 90 Croative patterns tt� chm-pse frotti. Bornanite combiner the brability Of. Conorde willb tilk! beauty of natktral nutiwial, Mwil Your ItvXE Illutilcipal proica dt?jiiaa&: a titudity paying prcAuct, call %,our lc: cal. Bomanitv contractor. Bomanite: The PaxinkInnovators. 1 OA-6 f . ..,, ram' : - - •4 r. ,t+rAk F ' Coventry Manor -Raised Cobblestone Areas D` o P \3 \- K � SE Q O -:� Cz G gv PDD . E 71 Raised Cobblestone Areas No Scale 9-1 10A-4 Geographic Information systems le City of Southlake, Texas N MEMORANDUM September 3, 1999 TO: Billy Campbell, City Manager FROM: Shawn Poe, Senior Civil Engineer SUBJECT: Approval of Change Order No. 2 to the contract with J. L. Bertram Construction & Engineering, Inc. for the installation of a bog culvert associated with the reconstruction of Ridgecrest Drive Action Requested: Approve Change Order No. 2 to the contract with J. L. Bertram Construction & Engineering, Inc. in the amount of $29,863.50 for the installation of a box culvert associated with the reconstruction of Ridgecrest Drive. Background Information: The reconstruction of Ridgecrest Drive includes several drainage improvements. The City has planned the drainage improvements for several years but were not constructed because no drainage easements existed. Three drainage easements were obtained for these drainage improvements when the Oakwood Pond Addition was platted. The drainage easements are required to convey the drainage from the land west of Ridgecrest to the creek that is east of Ridgecrest (see exhibit 1). The original design of the drainage improvements within these three drainage easements was to construct earthen channels that would extend from Ridgecrest to the creek. An additional drainage easement across the Shelton property (on the east side of Oakwood Pond) was also needed to grade -to -drain to the creek from drainage easement #2 (see exhibit 1). At this point, the creek is farther east of the Oakwood Pond property. Mr. Shelton would not voluntarily grant the easement unless the drainage was contained in a storm drain pipe within drainage easements #1 & #2. The City acquiesced to Mr. Shelton's demands and the storm drain was included in the original bid for the reconstruction of Ridgecrest Drive. The drainage improvements within drainage easement #3 remained an earthen channel due to cost considerations. The amount of drainage that is conveyed in drainage easement #3 is substantially more than what is conveyed in drainage easements #1 & #2, resulting in a larger storm drain structure. Construction began on the channel within drainage easement #3 in August 1999. There were several trees removed to construct the channel. During construction of the channel, it was determined that more trees would be 10B - 1 City of Southlake, Texas required to construct the channel as designed. The channel was designed with side slopes having a 4:1 ratio. In other words, the channel sides would slope down one vertical foot for every 4 horizontal feet. I have included pictures as the channel exists currently on exhibit 2. The channel as shown in the pictures has side slopes with approximately a 2:1 ratio. If a box culvert is installed in lieu of the channel, several trees can be saved and the property owner can maintain the drainage easement more effectively and easier. Financial Considerations: On November 17, 1998, the City Council approved the bid with J_L. Bertram for $311,560.56. On March 2, 1999, the City Council approved Change Order No. 1. The change order was to repave Southlake Park Road. Southlake Park Road was the only street not repaved in 1996 in the Hilltop and Kidwell Additions because the funds for that project were depleted (see exhibit 1). Change Order No. 1 totaled $28,479.75, which brought the contract price to $340,040.31. ♦ Change Order No. 2 totals 29,863.50 (see attached). This is to construct a box culvert from Ridgecrest Drive to the existing pond east of Ridgecrest Drive within drainage easement #3 (see exhibit 1). ♦ The current project cost, including engineering and surveying, is $370,640.31. ♦ Therefore, the project cost, including engineering, surveying, Change Order No. 1, and Change Order No. 2, is $400,503.81. This is $44,927.81 above the budgeted amount of $355,576. The additional funds can be obtained using existing funds that remain from past or ongoing projects. Attached is exhibit 3 that is the current CIP Project Cost Ledger that includes the additional cost of Change Order No. 2 for the Ridgecrest project. Citizen Input/ Board Review: Mr. & Mrs. Schaible reside at the residence where the proposed box culvert is located.. Obviously, the Schaibles are concerned about the removal of any additional trees on their property within the drainage easement. They would prefer the box culvert in lieu of the channel. Legal Review: None Alternatives: The only alternative rather than installing the box culvert is to build the channel as designed so that the drainage can be conveyed and the property owner can adequately maintain the channel. To do so, several trees within the drainage easement would have to be removed. 1013-2 City of Southlake, Texas Supporting Documents: Staff Recommendation: S�� SEP/sep Exhibit 1 Exhibit 2 Exhibit 3 Change Order No. 2 Staff recommends City Council approve Change Order No. 2 to the contract with J. L. Bertram Construction & Engineering, Inc. for the installation of a box culvert associated with the reconstruction of Ridgecrest Drive for the amount of $29,863.50. Please place this item on the September 7, 1999 Regular City Council Agenda for review and consideration. Approved for Submittal to City Council: f > City Manager's Office mAwd-files\memos\ridgecrest coldoc IOB-3 Exhibit I 0 C so E E = s C w P�44f Scheduled for Overlay a1 Change Order No. 1 O verlayed in 1996 oR ` K ARK R� E ARBOR VE H\ T R PK w 0 a m O ARB' J G �GNaGO- s MPNpR aEEI � Est PEE P\ P� aG ST < � U Z 7 E pR\N �FORp �N o 0PKs j 0- Existin P nd PTE Exist uN Q FL ��0 Z Creek ° D Drftge Easement # 3 IL �� CARR LL IL Drainage Easement # r ets �P MIDDLE r. Shelton D am ge ase e t SCHOOL C in ainage Ea ,eme t # s f Drainage Easement # 1 - 40' Drainage Easement # 2 - 40' Drainage Easement # 3 - 50' No sale Geographic Information Systems 10B-4 EXHIBIT x AM Rdgecrest Channel (Looking east from Ridgecrest Drive) Ridgecrest Channel (Looking west from pond toward Ridgecrest Drive) 108-5 EDIT 3 CI P PROJECT COSTS LEDGER m 14 A B C D 1 DESCRIPTION BUDGETED AMOUNT BID / FINAL COST DIFFERENCE 2 _PROJECT 1.5 MGD MIRON ELEVATED TOWER * $1,860,000 $1,832,000 $28,000 3 20" WATERLINE ALONG FM 1709 $641,000 $638,408 $2,592 4 24" WATER LINE ALONG N. WHITE CHAPEL $850,000 $826,455 $23,545 5 BRUMLOW $112,700 $111,000 $1,700 6 BURNEY LN. - REHAB CUL-DE-SAC $57,000 $64,523 ($7,523) 7 BYRON NELSON STOP LIGHT $40,000 $65,000 ($25,000) 8 BYRON NELSON STRIPING $65,000 $74,163 ($9,163) 9 COMMERCE TRAFFIC LIGHT* $100,000 $48,405 $51,595 10 DIAMOND CIRCLE STREETS & SEWER $1,286,000 $990,161 $295,839 11 DOVE ACRES SEWER * $405,000 $205,474 $199,526 12 DOVE FORCE MAIN* $1,747,500 $2,080,318 ($332,818) 13 DOVE/HIGHLAND PAVING* $611,480 $778,5331 (S167,053) 14 DOVE/SH 114 WATER LINE RELOCATION $339,200 $280,424 $58,776 15 FLORENCE TOWER TANK PAINTING $105,000 $152,200 ($47,200) 16 FM 1709 TRAFFIC SEQUENCING * $120,000 $42,000 $78,000 17 HILLWOOD SEWER* $95,000 $82,415 $12,586 18 HUNTWICK ESTATES SEWER $200,000 $276,123' ($76,123) 19 JELLICO SEWER * $500,000 $419,723 $80,277 20 KIRKWOOD WATER LINE $326,000 $266,159 $59,841 21 LAKE DRIVE WATER, SEWER, PAVING * $364,500i $376,9911 (S12,491) 22 LILAC LN. WATER, SEWER, STREET * $234,600j $286,782 ($52,182) 23 MISSION HILL SEWER $430,0001 $489,099 ($59,099) 24 N. WHITE CHAPEL - COUNTY LINE TO LAKE * $340,0001 $470,970 (S130,970) 25 N. WHITE CHAPEL - DOVE TO COUNTY LINE * $181,850 $177,010 $4,840 26 N-3 & N-4 LIFT STATIONS* $1,000,000 $1,009,500 ($9,500) 27 PEARSON GROUND STORAGE TANK NO.2 * $1,687,400 $1,545,247 $142,153 28 PINE SEWER* $200,000 $183,368 $16,632 29 PLANTATION SEWER $110,400 $84,676 $25,724 30 PUBLIC WORKS CENTER IMPROVEMENTS* $405,600 $472,580 ($66,980) 31 PUMP STATION NO. 2 * $3,110,000 $3,146,800 ($36,800) 32 RAINTREE / SHADY LN WATER, SEWER, PAVING $1,925,995 $1,615,029 $310,966 33 RIDGECREST * $355,576 $400,504 ($44,928) 34 SABRE SEWER CONNECTION - SOLANA $25,000 $21,700 $3,300 35 SHADY OAKS TRAFFIC LIGHT * $100,000 $91,000 $9,000 36 SOUTHLAKE / KELLER PUMP STATION MOD. $300,000 $294,000 $6,000 37 TIMARRON - BENT CREEK REPAIR * $726,986 $699,315 $27,671 38 TROPHY CLUB 24" WATER LINE * $1,511,000 $1,440,693 $70,307 39 W. CONTINENTAL RECON. - PHASE I * $640,424 $640,096 S329 40 W. DOVE RECON: PEYTONVILLE TO SHADY OAKS $259,680 $298,397 ($38,717) 41 WATER & SEWER TO MIRON ADDITION $196,781 $262,535 ($65,754) 42 TOTAL $23,566,6721 $23,239,774 43 TOTAL (OVERyUNDER BUDGET S326,898 44 45 *Project not yet complete. Cost shown reflects contract bid price & engineering, surveying costs 46 47 48 li . &31 /99 CHANGE ORDER No. 2 Date. August 31, 1999 OWNER'S Project No. 97-3005 _ENGINEER'S Project No. 001-229 Project Paving and Drainage Improvements Ridgecrest Drive OWNER City ofSouthlake Contract for Paving and Drainage Improvements Contract Date: December 9, 1998 To: J. L. Bertram Construction and Engineering Inc. Contractor You are directed to make the changes noted below in the subject contract: Citv ofSouthlake Owner Date: , 1999 Nature of the changes: Construction of 1 — 5' x 3' precast or poured in place box culvert in lieu of an open channel. See attached proposal tabulation. These changes result in the following adjustment of contract price and contract time: Contract Price Prior to this Change Order Net (Increase) (Decrease) Resulting from this Change Order Current Contract Price Including this Change Order NSPE-ASCE 1910-8-B (1978 Edition) 108-7 8 8340, 640.31 8 829.863.50 8 8400.503.81 Contract Time Prior to this Change 140 Calendar Days (Days or Date) Net (Increase) (Decrease) Resulting from this Change Order 60 Calendar Days (Days) Current Contract Time Including this Change The above changes are recommended: The above changes are accepted: 31 By: Date: By: Date: 200 Calendar Days (Days or Date) City ofSouthlake Owner Ronald J. Harper, P.E. 1999 J.L. Bertram Construction & EnQineering. Inc. Contractor 1999 Aug-16-99 10:46A J_L. BERTRAM CONSTRUCTION 2613044 P-02 LN ITEMS DELETED ITEM QUANTITY DESCRIPTION & PRICE IN WORDS NO. AND UNIT 1. 0 5.) 80 L.F. 42" dia. CLIII reinforced concrete pipe culverts, installed complete in place, to include pipe, excavation, installation, embedment and backfill for the sum of 2.(21.) 1 EA. 3.(22.) 7-26-C'y. 4.(23.) 1,600 SY PRICE IN FIGURES UNIT TOTAL One Hundred Twenty Two Dollars No Cents per linear foot S 122.00 3 9.760 00 Fumish & install Tex -Dot CH- 11 Type A endwall on double 42" dia. RCP storm drain pipe, complete installation for the sum of Thirteen Hundred Nine& Dollars NO Cents per each S 1,390 00 S 1,390.00 Unciassined channel excavation to tines and grades called for in the plans, complete for the sum of ThFee— Dollars &ZALSew1. Cents per cubic yard S —3. 7- S $ Furnish & install 6" thick reinforced concrete rip -rap where shown in the plans, complete installation, for the sum of Four Dollars Eighty One Cents per square foot S 181 S 7,696 00 5.(24.) 2.500 S.F. Construct 6" thick reinforced concrete channel lining where shown in the plans, complete installation, as detailed and/or as specified, including necessary excavation and grading, for the suin of Four Dollars Fighty One Cents per square foot S 4.81 S 12, 025. 00 a Aug-16-99 10:46A J.L. BERTRAM CONSTRUCTION 2613044 P-03 ITEM QUANTITY DESCRIPTION & PRICE IN WORDS PRICE IN FIGURES NO. AND UNIT UNIT TOTAL 6.(27.) 72 L.F. Furnish & install 2' x 2' "stone gabions" across waterway where called for in the plans, including necessary filter cloth, complete as detailed and/or as specified, for the sum of —_Thirty Three Dollars No Cents per linear foot S 33.00 .S 2 37b 00 ITEMS DELETED TOTAL: -s 33 z'/ 7 - ITEMS ADDED 7. 245.50 L.F. 5' x 3' Concrete box culvert H-20 TxDOT design; complete in place includingg excavation embedment and backfi[1 for the sum of -rt"C. Dollars per linear foot Al o Centsµ�S - 8.(23.) i ) 550 S.F. Furnish & install6 thick reinforced concrete rip -rap where shown in the plans, complete installation, for the sum of Four Dollars Eieh& Une Cents per square foot S 4.81 ,S 2.645. SO 9. 1 EA. 10' x 5' Drop inlet; complete in place for the sum of Frn� `ie s,a,m Dollars •�� Cents per each S S 'yr- Fill one blank only ITEMS ADDED TOTAL: DIFFERENCE INCREASE: DIFFERENCE DECREASE: P-2 1013-10 S 4.5 //o - S zgxl,3 AT-, City of Southlake, Texas MEMORANDUM September 3, 1999 To: Billy Campbell, City Manager From: Charlie Thomas, City Engineer Subject: Traffic Management Bond Program — HNTB Professional Services Agreement Action Requested: Authorize the Mayor to execute a professional services agreement with HNTB Engineers for management of the Traffic Management Bond Program. Background Information: On May 1, 1999, the voters in the City of Southlake approved the Traffic Management Bond Program to construct intersection improvements along F.M. 1709 and S.H. 114, construct part of the Trail System along F.M. 1709 and Whites Chapel Boulevard, and provide enhancements to the reconstruction of S.H. 114 by participating with TxDOT. After reviewing nine "request for qualifications" from local engineering firms and interviewing three personal presentations, a panel of City staff and two Councilpersons selected a consulting engineering firm, HNTB, to submit a proposal for managing the bond program which would include the design and construction plan preparation, right-of-way acquisition, utility relocation coordination and construction management, including daily construction inspection. Normally, the City hires a consultant to design and prepare construction plans for the improvements only. The City staff then acquires the necessary right of way, bids the project and manages the construction contract including daily inspections. 10C-1 Using a consultant to manage the bond program will eliminate the need to increase the City Staff just to complete the projects in the bond program. Tasks to be performed by consultant are: 1. Overall program management 2. Engineering design and plan preparation 3. Right-of-way acquisition 4. Utility relocation coordination 5. Construction management including inspections HNTB has considerable experience in managing municipal bond programs and are currently successfully managing programs for the Cities of Bedford and Flower Mound. After selection of the consultant by the City staff and two members of the City Council, the City staff has developed a scope of services with the consultant and negotiated a fee schedule for these services. Financial Considerations: Using a consultant for management of the bond program eliminates the need to increase City staff just for that purpose but requires a fee greater than the usual engineering design contract. The fee proposed by the consultant is $2,767,000. Citizen Input/ Board Review: None. Legal Review: This agreement was reviewed and approved by the City Attorney. Alternatives: The Council can approve the agreement or deny it, or modify the agreement. Supporting Documents: Agreement 10C-2 Staff Recommendation: Place on the September 7, 1999 City Council agenda for Council to review and approve. AW-Z Charlie J. Thom s City Engineer Approved for Submittal to City Council: City Manager's Office x 1OC-3 MASTER AGREEMENT FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES NOW, THIS AGREEMENT is entered into between City of Southlake (Owner) and HNTB Corporation (Engineer), for the following reasons: 1. Owner intends to implement Traffic Management Bond Program of Intersection Improvements and Hike and Bike Trail Improvements (the Program): and, 2. Owner requires certain engineering services in connection with the Program (the Services); and, 3. Engineer is prepared to provide the Services. In consideration of the promises contained in this Agreement, Owner and Engineer agree as follows: ARTICLE 1 - EFFECTIVE DATE information pertinent to the Project, including The effective date of this Agreement shall be previous reports, drawings, specifications or any 1999. other data as may be reasonably required by Engineer to perform its Services. ARTICLE 2 - TASK ORDERS b) Give prompt written notice to Engineer whenever Task Orders shall ce used to describe the parties Owner becomes aware of any development that mutual agreement on the scope of the Services, affects the scope or timing of Engineer's Services, schedule, compensation and other particulars or any defect in the Services of Engineer. regarding specific Program elements (defined as (c) Advise Engineer of the identity and scope of "Projects"). Task Orders shall be in the general form services of any independent consultants retained shown in attached Exhibit "A". Task Orders are by Owner to provide services in regard to the binding only after acceptance and execution by authorized representatives of both parties. Each Task Order shall govern the parties' rights and ARTICLE 7 - STANDARD OF CARE obligations with respect to each assignment, but all The same degree of care, skill, and diligence shall within the framework of this Agreement. In the event be exercised in the performance of the Services as of an inconsistency between the terms of any Task is ordinarily possessed and exercised by a member Order and the terms of this Agreement, the terms of of the same profession, currently practicing, under this Agreement shall prevail. similar circumstances. No other warranty, express or implied, is included in this Agreement or in any ARTICLE 3 -SCOPE OF SERVICES Task Order, drawing, specification, report, opinion, Engineer shall provide the Services described in or other instrument of service, in any form or media, Section A (Scope of Services) of each Task Order. produced in connection with the Services. ARTICLE 4 - SCHEDULE ARTICLE 8 - INDEMNIFICATION AND LIABILITY Engineer shall exercise its reasonable efforts to General. Having considered the potential liabilities perform those Services within the time frame set that may exist during the performance of the forth in Section B (Schedule) of each Task Order. Services, the relative benefits and risks of the ARTICLE 5 - COMPENSATION Project, and the Engineer's fee for the Services, and Owner shall pay Engineer in accordance with in consideration of the promises contained in this Section C (Compensation) of each Task Order. Agreement, Owner and Engineer agree to allocate Engineer shall periodically invoice Owner for and limit such liabilities in accordance with this Services rendered. Invoices shall be due and payable upon receipt. Owner shall give prompt Article. Indemnification. Engineer agrees to indemnify and written notice of any disputed amount and shall pay hold the Owner harmless from and against legal the remaining amount. Invoice amounts not paid liability for all judgments, losses, damages, and within 30 days after receipt shall accrue interest at expenses to the extent such judgments, losses, the rate of 1.0% per month (or the maximum rate damages, or expenses are caused by the Engineer's permitted by law, if less), with payments applied first negligent acts, errors, or omissions arising out of its to accrued interest and then to unpaid principal_ performance of the Services. In the event judgments, losses, damages, or expenses are ARTICLE 6 - OWNER'S RESPONSIBILITIES caused by the joint or concurrent negligence of Owner shall be responsible for all matters described Engineer and Owner, they shall be bome by each in Section D (Owner's Responsibilities), of each Task party in proportion to its own negligence. Order. In addition, Owner shall perform and provide Consequential Damages. To the fullest extent — the following in a timely manner so as not to delay the permitted by law, Engineer shall not be liable to Services of Engineer. Owner for any consequential damages resulting in (a) Place at Engineer's disposal all available any way from the performance of the Services. MasiAgr.doc 10C-4 02/13/98 Survival. The terms and conditions of this Article shall survive completion of the Services, or any termination of this Agreement. ARTICLE 9 - INSURANCE During the term of this Agreement. Engineer shall maintain the following insurance: a) General Liability Insurance, with a combined single limit of $1,000,000 per occurrence and $2,000,000 annual aggregate. (b) Automobile Liability Insurance, with a combined single limit of $1,000,000 for each person and 51,000,000 for each accident. (c) Workers' Compensation Insurance in accordance with statutory requirements and Employers' Liability Insurance, with a limit of S500,000 for each occurrence. 24) Professional Liability Insurance, with a limit of 31,000,000 annual aggregate. Engineer shall, upon written request, furnish Owner certificates of insurance which shall include a provision that such insurance shall not be canceled without at least thirty days' written notice to Owner. Owner shall require all Project contractors to include Owner and Engineer as additional insureds on their General and Automobile Liability insurance policies, and to indemnify both Owner and Engineer, each to the same extent. P_ncireer and Owner waive all rights against each other and their directors, officers, partners, commissioners, officials, agents, and employees for damages to the extent such damages are paid by insurance during and after the completion of the Services. ARTICLE 10 - LIMITATIONS OF RESPONSIBILITY Engineer shall not be responsible for (a) construction means, methods, techniques, sequences, procedures, or safety precautions and programs in connection with the Project; (b) the failure of any contractor, subcontractor, vendor, or other Project participant, not under contract to Engineer, to fulfill contractual responsibilities to Owner or to comply with federal, state, or local laws, regulations, and codes; or (c) procuring permits, certificates, and licenses required for any construction unless such procurement responsibilities are specifically assigned to Engineer in a Task Order. ARTICLE 11 - OPINIONS OF COST AND SCHEDULE Because Engineer has no control over the cost of labor, materials, or equipment furnished by others, or over the resources provided by others to meet Project schedules, Engineer's opinion of probable costs and of Project schedules, if any, shall be made on the basis of experience and qualifications as a — professional engineer. Engineer does not guarantee that proposals, bids, or actual Project costs will not vary from Engineer's cost estimates or that actual schedules will not vary from Engineer's projected schedules. ARTICLE 12 - REUSE OF DOCUMENTS All documents, including, but not limited to, drawings, specifications, and computer software prepared by Enaineer pursuant to this Agreement are instruments or service in respect to the Project. They are rnct intended or represented to be suitable for reuse by Owner or others on modifications or extensions of the Project or on any other project. Any reuse without prior written verification or adaptation by Engineer for the specific purpose intended will be at Owner's sole risk and without liability or legal exposure to Engineer. Owner shall indemnify and hold harmless Engineer and its subconsultants against all judgments, losses, damages, injuries, and expenses. including reasonable attorneys' fees, arising out of or resulting from such reuse. ARTICLE 13 - OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY Except as otherwise provided herein, engineering documents, drawings, and specifications prepared by Engineer and furnished to Owner as part of the Services shall become the property of Owner; provided, however, that Engineer shall have the unrestricted right to their use. Engineer shall retain its copyright and ownership rights in its design, drawing details, specifications, data bases, computer software, and other proprietary property. Intellectual property developed, utilized, or modified in the performance of the Services shall remain the property of Engineer. ARTICLE 14 - TERMINATION AND SUSPENSION This Agreement may be terminated by either party upon written notice in the event of substantial failure by the other party to perform in accordance with the terms of this Agreement; provided, however, the nonperforming party shall have 14 calendar days from the receipt of the termination notice to cure or to submit a plan for cure acceptable to the other party. Owner may terminate or suspend performance of this Agreement for Owner's convenience upon written notice to Engineer. Engineer shall terminate or suspend performance of the Services on a schedule acceptable to Owner, and Owner shall pay Engineer for all the Services performed plus termination or suspension expenses to be agreed upon by both the Owner and the Engineer. Upon restart of suspended Services, an equitable adjustment shall be made to Engineer's compensation and the Project schedule. Any documents or other work products for which the Engineer has been paid shall be furnished to the Owner upon termination. The provisions of this Article shall also apply to each 10C-5 0211 3i9a MastAgr.doc 40. individual Task Order, separate and apart from any other Task Orders, and without terminating or otherwise affecting this Agreement as a whole. ARTICLE 15 - DELAY IN PERFORMANCE Neither Owner nor Engineer shall be considered in default of this Agreement or any Task Order for delays in performance caused by circumstances beyond the reasonable control of the nonperforming party. For purposes of this Agreement, such circumstances include, but are not limited to, abnormal weather conditions; floods; earthquakes; fire; epidemics; war, riots, and other civil disturbances; strikes, lockouts, work slowdowns, and other labor disturbances; sabotage; judicial restraint; and delay in or inability to procure permits, licenses, or authorizations from any local, state, or federal agency for any of the supplies, materials, accesses, or services required to be provided by either Owner or Engineer under this Agreement or any Task Order. Engineer shall be granted a reasonable extension of time for any delay in its performance caused by any such circumstances. Should such circumstances occur, the :,,;Pe, forming party shail, within a reasonable time of being prevented from performing, give written notice to the other party describing the circumstances preventing continued performance and the efforts being made to resume performance. (40, ARTICLE 16 - NOTICES Any notice required by this Agreement shall be made in writing to the address specified below: Owner: City of Southlake 17256 E. Southlake Blvd. Southlake. Texas 76092 Engineer: HNTB Corporation 512 Main Street, Suite 1200 Fort Worth, Texas 76102 Nothing contained in this Article shall be construed to restrict the transmission of routine communications between representatives of Owner and Engineer. ARTICLE 17 - DISPUTES In the event of a dispute between Owner and Engineer arising out of or related to this Agreement, or any Task Order, the aggrieved party shall notify the other party of the dispute within a reasonable time after such dispute arises. If the parties cannot thereafter resolve the dispute, each party shall nominate a senior officer of its management to meet to resolve the dispute by direct negotiation or mediation. Should such negotiation or mediation fail to resolve the dispute, either party may pursue resolution in any '-+r.,. court having jurisdiction. During the pendency of any dispute, the parties shall continue diligently to fulfill their respective obligations hereunder. ARTICLE 18 - EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY The Engineer hereby affirms its support of affirmative action and that it abides by the provisions of the "Equal Opportunity Clause" of Section 202 of Executive Order 11246 and other applicable laws and regulations. Engineer affirms its policy to recruit and hire employees without regard to race, age, color, religion, sex, sexual preference/orientation, marital status, citizen status, national origin or ancestry, presence of a disability or status as a Veteran of the Vietnam era or any other legally protected status. It is Engineer's policy to treat employees equally with respect to compensation, advancement, promotions, transfers and all other terms and conditions of employment. Engineer further affirms completion of applicable governmental employer information reports including the EEO-1 and VETS-100 reports. and maintenance of a current Affirmative Action Plan as required by Federal regulations. ARTICLE 19 - WAIVER A waiver by either Owner or Engineer of any breach of this Agreement shall be in writing. Such a waiver shall not affect the waiving parry's rights with respect to any other or further breach. ARTICLE 20 - SEVERABILITY The invalidity, illegality, or unenforceability of any provision of this Agreement or the occurrence of any event rendering any portion or provision of this Agreement void shall in no way affect the validity or enforceability of any other portion or provision of this Agreement or any Task Order. Any void provision shall be deemed severed from this Agreement, and the balance of this Agreement shall be construed and enforced as if it did not contain the particular portion or provision held to be void. The parties further agree to amend this Agreement to replace any stricken provision with a valid provision that comes as close as possible to the intent of the stricken provision. The provisions of this Article shall not prevent this entire Agreement from being void should a provision which is of the essence of this Agreement be determined void. ARTICLE 21 - INTEGRATION This Agreement, including Exhibit "A' (incorporated by this reference), and subsequently issued Task Orders (and their respective attachments, if any), represents the entire and integrated agreement between Owner and Engineer. It supersedes all prior and contemporaneous communications, representations, and agreements, whether oral or written, relating to the subject matter of this Agreement. MastAgr.doc 3 1 OC-6 02/13/98 ARTICLE 22 - SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS Owner and Engineer each binds itself and its successors, executors, administrators, permitted assigns, legal representatives and, in the case of a partnership, its partners, to the other party to this Agreement and to the successors, executors, administrators, permitted assigns, legal representatives, and partners of such other party in respect to all provisions of this Agreement. ARTICLE 23 - ASSIGNMENT Neither Owner nor Engineer shall assign any rights or duties under this Agreement without the prior written consent of the other party, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld; provided, however, Engineer may assign its rights to payment without Owner's consent. Unless otherwise stated in the written consent to an assignment, no assignment will release or discharge the assignor from any obligation under this Agreement. Nothing contained in this Article shall prevent Engineer from engaging independent consultants, associates, and subcontractors to assist in the performance of the Services. ARTICLE 24 - NO THIRD PARTY RIGHTS The Services provided for in this Agreement are for the sole use and benefit of Owner and Engineer. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to give any rights or benefits to anyone other than Owner and Engineer. ARTICLE 25 - GOVERNING LAW This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Texas. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Owner and Engineer have executed this Agreement. City of Southlake (Owner) Signature: By: Rick Stacey Title: Mayor Date HNTB Corporation (Engineer) Signature: By: Richard L. Ridings Title Vice President Date MastAgr.doc 4 1 OC-7 0211198 Example Exhibit "A" - Task Order TASK ORDER NUMBER This Task Order is made as of this day of , 1999, under the terms and conditions established in the MASTER AGREEMENT FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES, dated (the Agreement), between City of Southlake (Owner) and HNTB Corporation (Engineer). This Task Order is made for the following purpose, consistent with the Project defined in the Agreement: [Insert a brief description of the Project elements to which the Task Order applies] Section A. - Scope of Services A.1. Engineer shall perform the following Services: A.2. The following Services are not included in this Task Order, but shall be provided as Additional Services if authorized or confirmed in writing by the Owner: A.3. In conjunction with the performance of the foregoing Services, Engineer shall provide the following submittals/deliverables (Documents) to Owner: Section B. - Schedule Engineer shall perform the Services and deliver the related Documents (if any) according to the following schedule: Section C. - Compensation C.1. In return for the performance of the foregoing obligations, Owner shall pay to Engineer the amount of S , payable according to the following terms: C.2. Compensation for Additional Services (if any) shall be paid by Owner to Engineer according to the following terms: MastAgr.dcc 1 OC-8 Exhibit "A" Section D. - Owner's Responsibilities Owner shall perform andior provide the following in a timely manner so as not to delay the Services of Engineer. Unless otherwise provided in this Task Order, Owner shall bear all costs incident to compliance r with the following: Section E. - Other Provisions The parties agree to the following provisions with respect to this specific Task Order: ExcePt to the extent modified herein, all terms and conditions of the Agreement shall continue in full force and effect. Owner: _ By: Sic^atu,re: Title: Date: 1OC-9 MastAgr.doc Engineer: HNTB Corporation By: Sionature: Title: Date: Exhibit "A" Task Order No. 01 HNTB CORPORTATION TO CITY OF SOUTHLAKE FOR Traffic Management Bond Program Intersection and Trail Improvements This Task Order is made as of this day of September, 1999, under the terms and conditions established in the MASTER AGREEMENT FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES, dated _ _ (the Agreement), between (City of Southlake) Owner and (HNTB Corporation) Engineer. This Task Order is made for the following projects, consistent with the Program defined in the Agreement: The proposed Traffic Management Bond Program, hereinafter referred to as the "Program", %W„ consists of multiple intersection improvements and Hike/Bike trail improvements. The Program consists of multiple project packages to include General Engineering, pre -design, survey, right- of-way acquisition, design, bidding, public relations and resident project representation (administration and observation). SECTION A. - SCOPE OF SERVICES A.1. The Engineer shall perform the following Services: The following projects are included in this task order. Southlake Boulevard (FM 1709) Signalized Intersection Improvements and Deceleration Lanes 001 Pearson Lane: 500-feet north; 500-feet south 002 Randol Mill Avenue/Davis (FM 1938): 650-feet north Randol Mill 003 Peytonville Avenue: 700-feet north; 800-feet south 004 Southridge Lakes Parkway, deceleration lane only 005 Shady Oaks Drive: 500-feet north 006 White Chapel Blvd: I I00-feet north; 900-feet south 007 Byron Nelson Parkway/Diamond Blvd., deceleration lane only 008 Carroll Avenue: 1000-feet south Southlake Task Order 01.doc Page 1 of 25 10C-10 ; s fie,.. -- I.%.- 009 Commerce Street, deceleration lane only SH 26 Signalized Intersection Improvements 010 Brumlow; 400-feet (to concrete plant driveway) Southlake Boulevard (FM 1709)Non-Signalized Intersection Improvements - Deceleration lane only 011 Bank Street 012 Westwood Drive 013 Miron Drive 014 Foxborough Lane 015 Lake Crest Drive 016 Timber Lake Place 017 Stone Lakes Place 018 Meadowlark Lane 019 Ginger Court 020 Brock Drive East Jellico 022 West Jellico 023 Entrance to Bicentennial Park Hike and Bike Trail Improvements 024 FM 1709 Trail 025 Bicentennial Park to Southridge Lakes sidewalk/trail 036 SH 26 to Bob Jones Park Trail Scope of services for the above program is based on the following assumptions: • Southlake will provide any information they have available regarding the intersections and the hike/bike trail corridors. • Southlake will provide for the Engineer's use information on the Southlake Geodetic Network. • TxDOT plans on FM 1709 and information on the ROW (strip map, land owners) are available. Work excluded from this base Scope shall be as follows: • ROW condemnation, MAI appraisals, Commissioners Court exhibits • Environmental management Southlake Task Order 01.doc 10C-11 Page 2 of 25 S"" • Geotechnical investigations TASK DESCRIPTIONS Work to be performed under this task order shall include the following tasks: 1. Project management 2. Pre -design and Data Collection �. Program survey 4. Right-of-Way/Real Estate Services 5. Preliminary Design 6. Final Design 7. Bid Phase 8. Construction Phase 9. Operational Phase 10. Public Relations 11. Submittals and Deliverables The folloi ina information uill explain and define in more detail the major -tasks relati^_a to tile preliminary engineering and final design plans for this project. 1. Project Management. The Program Manager will be responsible for directing and coordinating all activities associated with projects. 1.1.1 Management Plan A brief management plan shall be prepared to identify the team organization and responsibilities, coordination and communication procedures, team meetings, document format, report format, technical memorandum format, graphic production standards, and other important operational information pertaining to team activities. 1.1.2 Progress Reports, Invoices and Billings The Program Manager will prepare monthly progress reports for review by the Owner. Invoices for all work completed during the period will be submitted monthly. Monthly progress reports will include: • Activities during the reporting period; • Activities planned for the following period; • Problems encountered and actions to remedy them; • Overall status, percent complete by task, and schedule showing progress. 1.1.3 Project Coordination/Administration The Program Manager will oversee the preparation of all design documents and manage all design activities including the following: Southlake Task Order 01.doc 1 OC- 1 2 Page 3 of 25 I • Project Administration - The Program. Manager will manage all project activities, including meetings, project direction of team and staff, correspondence with and response to the Owner, which would include assistance in the preparation of responses to inquiries. • Design Coordination - All correspondence and coordination will be handled through and with the concurrence of the Project Coordinator. • Coordination Meetings - Meetings will be held with applicable local, regional, state and federal agencies; property owners with significant issues which may be affected by the project; utility owners; railroad companies; other consulting firms; etc., as needed or required by the Owner. • Correspondence - The Program Manager will submit all written materials, letters, survey forms, etc. used to solicit information or collect data for the project to the Owner, or designee, for review and acceptance before its use or distribution. Copies of all outgoing correspondence and all incoming correspondence will be provided to the Owner, on a continuing basis. Correspondence a::: icpOtis �viil'oear ti1C pr- �'== t tl_, IOCaI, state and federal project numbers as appropriate. • Lines of Communication - Communications between Program Manager and the Owner will be through the Communications and Project Coordinator a' - - -:f:� !-.v rni- P:oaram �lanaaer. unless odiel�vlse Ullct--tcu i:: ti7::.:_ia �� o- a • Communication with Other Agencies -Communications with other agencies regarding this project will be handled solely by the Owner to ensure all parties are properly notified of any conclusions reached from these communications. • Release of Information - The release of any project related information by the Program Manager shall be approved by the Owner and the Project Coordinator. • Document Printing and Distribution - the Program Manager will be responsible for printing copies of all draft and final contract documents, reports, newsletters, etc., produced for the project except where defined by each specific task. Whenever possible, copies should be double -sided. The Owner will be responsible for the distribution of all draft and final contract documents to appropriate agencies and the public. 1.1.4 Project Control/Scheduling The Program Manager shall develop a project schedule indicating tasks, subtasks, critical dates, milestones, deliverables and agency review requirements. Progress will be reviewed monthly and should these reviews indicate a substantial change in progress, the schedule will then be reviewed and discussed with the Owner. 1.1.5 Subconsultant Management The Engineer will prepare subcontracts for subconsultants, monitor subconsultant activities (staff and schedule), and review and recommend approval of Southlake Task Order 01.doc 10C-13 Page 4 of 25 subconsultant invoices. Subconsultant progress reports and invoices will be incorporated into the monthly project progress report and invoice described in Subtask 1.2. 1.1.6 Engineering Tasks 1.1.6.1 Assist and advise the Owner, including attendance at meetings as requested, in matters of engineering policy in administration, planning, and design of the Program, and prepare a record of such activity. 1.1.6.2 Provide engineering advice and assistance to the Owner during development of designs, plans, and specifications for the Program. 1.1.6.3 Perform review, coordination, and liaison work among the Owner, interested public and private entities, and local governments to achieve efficiency and continuity in Program public and private utility relocation and adjustment planning and design. 1.1.6.4 Attend coordination meetings during utility relocation and adjustment and Program design and construction plan development to discuss such items as permanent and temporary easements, right-of-way, detours, etc. Advise the Owner on engineering concerns or possible solutions for items discussed at those meetings. 1.1.6.5 Assist the Owner in negotiation with utility companies; railroads; transit lines; electric companies; telephone, telegraph, and cable companies; gas line companies; municipal, state, and other public agencies; water supply and sewage districts; drainage, irrigation, and flood control districts; and other public and private companies regarding the crossings, abandonments, closings, or relocations of their respective public or private utility facilities and participate in the negotiations, on behalf of the Owner, for agreements covering such crossing, abandonments, closing, or reallocations. 1.1.6.6 Develop geometric design and specifications criteria to establish uniform practices to be following for acquiring design survey and geotechnical information and performing construction plan preparation for the Program. 1.1.6.7 Develop criteria to direct the surveyors in the performance of professional services related to right-of-way surveys, preparing plats and legal descriptions for right-of-way parcels, establishing benchmarks and benchmark loops, performing and setting control survey lines and monuments, as required. 1.1.6.8 Provide the Owner with monthly reports of progress and a summary of key decisions that have been made or need to be made. 1.1.6.9 Develop construction schedules for projects to be included in engineering design, plans, and specifications. Southlake Task Order 01.doc 10C-14 Page 5 of 25 1.1.6.10 Prepare quarterly financial project status reports on bond projects for Owner bondholders. All reports are to be prepared in a format suitable for public/press distribution. 1.2. Pre -design and Data Collection 1.2.1 Prepare for, attend and document the project kick-off meeting for the Traffic Management Bond Program with the Owner's staff to set priorities, coordinate various aspects of the projects, establish lines of communication, finalize project goals, schedule, confirm the preliminary trail alignment study corridors, and establish the following design standards to be used during the projects: - North Central Texas Council of Government Specifications - Current TxDOT standards - AASHTO Policy on Geometric Design of Urban Highways - AASHTO Guide for the Design of Bicvcle Facilities - Current TNR, TxDOT, MUTCD and FHWA manuals - Americans with Disabilities Act Guidelines - Owner: Drainage Manual, Paving Manual and Design Standards, Water Utility Specifications, Traffic Signalization and Illumination Standanrds, Tree Preservation Ordinance - Other applicable design references Attend approximately two additional coordination meetings and three public review meeting as required. 1.2.2 Data Collection. In addition to data supplied by the Owner, the Engineer will research and make efforts to obtain pertinent information to aid in coordination of the proposed improvements with any planned future improvements that may influence the project. The Engineer will also identify and seek to obtain data for existing conditions that may impact the project, including, but not necessarily restricted to: utilities, the Owner's master plans, property ownership, preliminary geotechnical information. 1.2.3 Coordination With Other Agencies. Consult with the Owner and other appropriate municipalities, public, private utilities, or government agencies and TxDOT to determine the extent of available previous engineering studies that may have an impact or influence on the project. Information gathered from utilities will be documented including identification any conflicts which may impact the method of construction or require relocation of a specific utility. 1.2.4. Prepare a photographic survey of key intersections and of the hikeibike project area for use in the project kick-off meeting and in the public review process showing the following information: 1-4.1 " - Existing intersections and existing trail systems to connect to the proposed network Southiake Task Order 01.doc Page 6 of 25 1 OC-15 - Identified trail alignments for Hike/Bike trails - Existing and proposed development areas Roadways and other transportation corridors Potential Pedestrian / Vehicular Conflicts Significant areas of natural vegetation for Hike/Bike trails Other significant elements 1 2.4 Prepare a summary of urban design opportunities and constraints for each intersection and site development opportunities and constraints for each hike/bike corridor. 1.2.5 Prepare a conceptual urban design plan identifying a hierarchy of intersection treatments and a conceptual hike/bike trail plan identifying locations / alignments for trails, rest areas, landscape amenities, and site furnishings. 1.2.6 Prepare intersection image boards identifying alternatives for special paving materials and locations, landscaping, walls, logos, signage and other Urban Design elements intended to further define the "image" of Southlake and hike/bike image boards identifvina alternatives for benches, lights, water fountains, signage and other site furnishings. 1.2.7 Prepare the following graphic exhibits in addition to the conceptual design plan and image boards: - Typical intersection cross -sections identifying urban design enhancements; - Typical plans of each hierarchical type of intersection - One perspective sketch of each type of intersection illustrating urban design enhancements. - Typical trail cross -sections; - Typical plans of special trail areas (rest areas, trail connections); - Three (3) perspective sketches illustrating key trail areas. 1.2.8 Prepare a preliminary Opinion of Probable Costs for intersection urban design enhancements and prepare a preliminary Opinion of Probable Costs and identify alternative funding sources for trail system improvements. 1.2.9 Present conceptual study findings to the Owner including opportunities and constraints urban design plans, conceptual trail plans, image boards and opinion of probable costs for review and comment. 1.2.10 Assist the Owner in facilitating a public meeting designed to be informative, gain input, and promote a consensus -building environment. 1.2.11 Recommend the technically preferred urban design concept and the technically preferred trail concept (including alignment and site furnishings) to the Owner based on ultimate right-of-way, public comment, technical constraints, construction cost and other criteria. Southlake Task Order 01.doc 1 QC-1 s Page 7 of 25 1 2.12 Prepare, submit and acquire a Corps of Engineers permit for the trail crossing at Walnut Grove Park. 1.2.13 Monthly Traffic Management Bond Program status meetings, approximately 42 meetings 1.2.14 Bi-monthly utility meetings, approximately 16 meetings. 1.2.1 5 Quarterly schedule updates and reviews with owner, approximately 14 meetings. 1.2.16 Other meetings with TxDOT etc., approximately 8 meetings. 1.3. Program survey Surveyor shall provide survey services using NAD 83 and tying to the Owner GPS base. A log of base bench marks to be provided. 1.3.1 Provide property- surveys or other related engineering services needed for engineering surveys for design and topographic information for intersection improvements and hike/bike trials and the transfer of interests in real property and field surveys. Survey to include establishment of a baseline, benchmark circuit, horizontal and vertical ties of critical existing facilities and features, including offsite features influencing design, elevatinos of existing driveways and connecting roads, profiles of intersecting streets, corss-sections and re -setting of horizontal and vertical control for construction contractor. Construction staking will be an additional service (it is assumed that the contractor will do own staking). 1.3.2 Utility locations will be required. Coordination with utilities and potholing for field verification of facility locations to be included. 1.3.3 Preparation of temporary and/or permanent easements and right of way acquisition documents. Surveyor will prepare survey of the parent tract, preparation of description and exhibit, signed and sealed by a Texas licensed surveyor. Services will also include an overall parcel map (strip map) with topography, physical features and landscaping. All ROW documents shall be prepared and detailed per TxDOT standard and criteria (include trees and utilities). There are approximately 49 tracts for ROW prep. 1.4 Right-of-way/Real Estate Services Provide turnkey real estate acquisition for approximately 49 parcels. 1.4.1 Basic Real Estate - Basic real estate services shall include the following: A. Property Ownership - B. Right of Entry - C. Document preparation Southlake Task Order 01.doc 10C-17 Page 8 of 25 D. Title information E. Valuation of parcels - one valuation prepared, choice of method F. Determination of initial offer G. Negotiation — 3to 4 contacts (meeting, mail or phone) with land owner, present documents, make initial offer H. Closing procedures I. Condemnation - after final offer, a "file package" will be prepared J. Documentation K. Attorney services L. Approximately two Council presentations on acquisition status. 1.4.2 Additional Real Estate - The following shall be considered additional real estate services: A. Additional Valuation of Parcels B. MAI appraisal C. Negotiation - additional effort such as overnight travel D. Condemnation =additional serT ice for eminent domain, updating appraisal, update title. coordination of witnesses for hearings, right-of-way agent testimony and attorney services. E. Commissioner exhibits F. Peri'._ tS '``�•� G. Additional ROW parcels beyond 49. 1.5. Preliminary Design Phase. After authorization in writing to proceed with the Preliminary Design Phase, THE ENGINEER shall: 1.5.1. Prepare preliminary intersection design plan review documents (50% complete) consisting of final design criteria, preliminary drawings, outline specifications, and written descriptions of the Project. For the selected urban design treatments including the following: - Site details for amenities (benches, drinking fountain, special signing, etc.) - Detailed plans of special paving at intersections - Landscape planting and irrigation plans - Outline Specifications. 1.5.2 Prepare preliminary trail design plans (approx. 50% complete Construction Documents) for the selected alignment including the following: - Horizontal plan and vertical profiles - Typical trail and pavement cross -sections Southlake Task Order 01.doc Page 9 of 25 10-18 - Retaining walls - Trail signing plans - Site details for trail amenities (benches, drinking fountain, special signing, etc.) - Detailed plans of special trail areas - Landscape planting and irrigation plans - Outline Specifications 1.5.3. Advise OWNER if additional data are necessary and assist OWNER in obtaining such data and services. 1.5.4. Based on the information contained in the preliminary design documents, submit a revised opinion of probable Total Project Costs. 1.5.5. Attend meetings with OWNER representative, local officials, state and federal agencies, utility companies, citizens directly impacted by the projects, and others regarding the proposed project, be it general design, functions and impact: three meetings for the Hike/Bike Trials and two meeting for the Intersection Improvements. _ 1.5.6 Submit copies of preliminary plans to the utility companies for review and coordination with copy to the Owner. 1.5.7 Provide five (5) complete full size blueline sets of Project preliminary design plans and outline specifications to OWNER for review. Owner shall distribute preliminary documents provided for review. 1.6. Final Design Phase. After authorization in writing to proceed with the Final Design Phase, THE ENGINEER shall: 1.6.1. On the basis of the accepted Preliminary Design documents and the revised opinion of probable Total Project Costs, prepare for incorporation in the Contract Documents final detailed construction drawings, specifications, instructions to bidders, general provisions and special provisions, all based on forms furnished to the ENGINEER by the OWNER. Contract Documents (Plans, Specifications, and Estimates) will be prepared for each construction contract. These designs shall be in accordance with sound engineering principle. 1.6.2 Prepare final intersection urban design plans for the selected alignment including the following: - Horizontal plan and vertical profiles - Typical pavement cross -sections - Retaining walls Southlake Task Order 01.doc 1OC-19 Page 10 of 25 1kw - Signing plans - Site details for amenities (benches, drinking fountain, special signing, etc.) - Detailed plans of special paving at intersections Landscape planting and irrigation plans Specifications. Environmental Categorical exclusions 1.6.3 Prepare Final trail design plans for the selected alignment including the following: - Horizontal plan and vertical profiles - Typical trail and pavement cross -sections - Retaining walls - Trail signing plans - Site details for trail amenities (benches, drinking fountain, special signing, etc.) - Detailed plans of special trail areas - Landscape planting and irrigation plans - Specifications. _ 1.6.4. Attend approximately 10 meetings and conferences as may be necessary to obtain information and coordinate and/or resolve any design matters or questions. ,... �- 1.6.5. Advise OWNER of any adjustments to the latest opinion of probable Total Project Costs caused by change in general scope, extent, or character or design requirements of the Project or Construction Costs. Furnish to OWNER a revised opinion of probable Total Project Costs based on the Drawings and Specifications. 1.6.4. Prepare for review and approval by OWNER, its legal counsel and other advisors' contract agreement forms, general conditions and supplementary conditions, and (where appropriate) bid forms, invitations to bid, and instructions to bidders. 1.6.5. Submit to the OWNER, advance copies of the plans and specifications and opinion of probable Total Project Costs for review. The ENGINEER will make any additions to respond to comments by the OWNER. When the documents have been approved, the ENGINEER will furnish plans to the OWNER for bidding and coordination purposes. 1.6.6 Submit copies of final drawings to the utility companies for review and records. 1.6.7 Provide five (5) complete full size sets of final design drawings and specifications to the OWNER for final review. Owner shall distribute final documents provided. The Engineer will incorporate the Owner's final review comments as appropriate. When the documents have been approved, the Engineer will complete the documents for bidding. f 1.6.7 Provide ten complete sets, five full size and five half size, of bid package documents to the OWNER for their use and records. Southlake Task Order 01.doc Page 11 of 25 1 OC-20 1.7. Bid Phase. After authorization to proceed with the Bid Phase: 1.7.1. Advertising and obtaining bids or negotiating proposals for each separate prime contract for construction, materials, equipment, and services. Maintain a record of prospective bidders Documents have been issued, attend pre bid conferences, and receive and process purchases of Bidding Documents. 1.7.2. Issue addenda as appropriate to interpret, clarify, or expand the Bidding Documents. 1.7.3. Recommend acceptability of subcontractors, suppliers, and other persons and organizations proposed by the prime contractor(s) (herein called "Contractor(s)"). 1.7.4. Review and determine the acceptability of substitute materials and equipment proposed by Contractor(s). 1.7.5. Assist OWNER in evaluating bids or proposals. 1.7.6. Assist the OWNER in the execution of all contract documents and furnish six copies of executed documents for the OWNER and Contractor. 1.8. Construction Phase. After authorization to proceed with the Construction Phase, the ENGINEER shall: 1.8.1. General Administration of Construction Contract. The ENGINEER act as OWNER's representative. All of OWNER's instructions to Contractor(s) will be issued through the ENGINEER who will have authority to act on behalf of OWNER to the extent provided in construction Specifications except as otherwise provided in writing. 1.8.2. Visits to Site and Observation of Construction. In connection with observations of the work of Contractor(s) while it is in process: 1.8.2.1. The ENGINEER shall make visits to the site at intervals appropriate to the various stages of construction as the ENGINEER deems necessary. 1.8.2.2 The ENGINEER shall provide the services of a Resident Project Representative according to Attachment A. 1.8.2.3. The Resident Project Representative will be the ENGINEER's agent or employee and under the ENGINEER's supervision. Southlake Task Order 01.doc 1 OC-21 Page 12 of 25 1.8.2.4. Defective Work. The ENGINEER may disapprove of or reject Contractor(s)' work while it is in progress. 1.8.4. Interpretations and Clarifications. The ENGINEER shall issue necessary interpretations and clarifications of the Contract Documents and prepare work directive changes and change orders as required. 1.8.5. Shop Drawings. The ENGINEER shall review and approve (or take other appropriate action in respect of) Shop Drawings, samples, sequence of construction plan and other data which Contractor(s) are required to submit, but only for conformance with the design concept of the Project. 1.8.6. Substitutes. The ENGINEER shall evaluate and determine the acceptability of substitute materials and equipment proposed by Contractor(s). 1.8.7. Inspections and Tests. The ENGINEER shall have authority, as OWIVTER's representative. to require special inspection or testing ofthe work, and shall receive and rez,i..v all certificates of inspections, testing, and approvals required by laws, rules, regulations, ordinances, codes, orders, or the Contract Documents (but only to determine generally that their content complies with the requirements of, and the results certified indicate compliance with, the Contract Documents.) Costs of mareriatc recr-na not included in the quoted fee and will be a separate reimbursable expense. 1.8.8. Disputes between OWNER and Contractor. The ENGINEER shall act as initial interpreter of the requirements of the Contract Documents. 1.8.9. Applications for Payment. Based on the ENGNEER's on -site observations, on information provided by the Resident Project Representative and on review of applications for payment and the accompanying data and schedules: 1.8.9.1. The ENGINEER shall determine the amounts owing to Contractor(s) and recommend in writing payments to Contractor(s) in such amounts. 1.8.10. Contractor(s)' Completion Documents. The ENGINEER shall receive and review maintenance and operating instructions, schedules, guarantees, bonds and certificates of inspection, tests, and approvals which are to be assembled by Contractor(s) and shall transmit them to OWNER with written comments. 1.8.11. Inspections. The ENGINEER shall conduct an inspection to determine if the work is substantially complete and a final inspection with the OWNER to determine if the completed work is acceptable. Southiake Task Order 01.doc Page 13 of 25 1 OC-22 1.9. Operational Phase. During the Operational Phase, the ENGINEER shall, when requested by OWNER: 1.9.1. Provide assistance in the closing of any financial or related transaction for the Project. 1.9.2. Provide assistance in connection with the refining and adjusting of any equipment or system. 1.9.3. Assist OWNER in training OWNER's staff to operate and maintain the Project. 1.9.4. Assist OWNER in developing systems and procedures for control of the operation and maintenance of and record keeping for the Project. 1.9.5. Prepare a set of reproducible record prints of Drawings showing those changes made during the construction process, based on the marked -up prints, drawings, and other data u71-ilished by Contractor(s) to the ENGTINEER and. which the ENGIIN'EER considers significant. Submit both plan sheets and plans in electronic format. 1.9.6. In company with OWNER, visit the Project to observe any apparent defects in the ccmpleted construction, assist OWNER in consultations and discussions with Contractor(s) concerning correction of such deficiencies, and make recommendations as to replacement or correction of defective work. 1.10. Public Relations. Provide monthly Program status update (project sheets), design and construction, for the 42- month contract period in a format suitable to the OWNER for entry into the city website. Provide approximately 12 public information meetings to include presentations to SPIN, schools, PTAs, churches. Attend City Council Meetings once a month. 1.11 Submittal and Deliverables In conjunction with the performance of the foregoing Services, the Engineer shall provide the following submittals/deliverables (Documents) to the Owner: • Photographic Survey Boards (2-3) • Opportunities and Constraints Map (1) • Illustrative Schematic design Plan (1) • Perspective Drawings (3) • Preliminary Design plans (five sets) Southlake Task Order 01.doc 1 Uri-23 Page 14 of 25 • Final Design plans (five sets) • Bid Phase plans (10 sets) • Provide to utility companies half size set of preliminary and final plans. • Provide reproducible prints of the record drawings and the same in electronic format on a CD in AutoCADD, Version 14.0. A.2 - ADDITIONAL SERVICES OF ENGINEER 2.1 Services Requiring Authorization in Advance. The following Services are not included in this Task Order, but shall be provided as Additional Services if authorized in writing by OWNER, and agreed to by the ENGINEER, the ENGINEER shall provide for OWNER professional services of the types listed in paragraphs 2.1.1. through 2.1.13. inclusive in all phases of each Program Project to which this Agreement applies. These services are not included as part of Basic Services. Additional specific consulting services to be provided by the ENGNFFR- may be added by amendment to the Agreement by subsequent task orders and executed by both parties. 2.1.1 Preparation of applications and supporting documents for private or governmental grants, loans or advances in connection with the Project: preparation or review of environmental assessments, impact statements, and permits; review and evaluation of the effect on the design requirements of the Project of any such statements and documents prepared by others; and assistance in obtaining approvals of authorities having jurisdiction over the anticipated environmental impact of the Project. 2.1.2. Services to make measured drawings of, or to investigate existing conditions or facilities, or to verify the accuracy of drawings or other information furnished by OWNER. 2.1.3. Services resulting from significant changes in the general scope, extent, or character of the Project or ENGINEER's scope of work, and revising previously accepted studies, reports, design documents, or Contract Documents when such revisions are required by changes in laws, rules, regulations, ordinances, codes, or orders enacted subsequent to the preparation of such studies, reports, or documents, or are due to any other causes beyond the ENGINEER's control. 2.1.4. Providing renderings or models for OWNER's use. 2.1.5. Preparing documents for alternate designs or bids requested by OWNER. 2.1.6. Investigations and studies involving, but not limited to, detailed consideration of operations, maintenance, and overhead expenses; providing value engineering during the course of design; the preparation of feasibility studies, cash flow, and economic evaluations, rate schedules, and appraisals; assistance in obtaining financing for the Project; evaluating processes available for licensing and assisting OWNER in obtaining process licensing; detailed quantity Southlake Task Order 01.doc Page 15 of 25 1 OC-24 f YAt- surveys of material, equipment, and labor; and audits or inventories required in connection with construction performed by OWNER. 2.1.7 Furnishing services of independent professional associates and Engineer's for other than Basic Services (Basic Services include customary civil, structural, mechanical, and electrical engineering, geotechnical) and customary architectural design incidental thereto); furnishing materials testing. 2.1.8. Furnishing services resulting from the award of more separate prime contracts than are contemplated for construction, materials, or equipment for the Project. Currently, several smaller projects have been lumped together for a larger construction package. Furnishing services attributable to the preparation of contract documentation that was rendered unusable and any revisions or additions to contract documentation used that was necessitated by the change in number of construction contracts awarded. 2.1.9. Services during out-of-town travel (more than 50 miles from Southlake) required of the ENGINEER other than visits to the site or OWNER's office as required -by Sections 1 and 2. 2.1.10. Assistance in connection with bid protests, re -bidding or re -negotiating contracts for construction, materials, equipment or services. w.. 2.1.12. Preparation of operating, maintenance, and staffing manuals to supplement Basic Services. 2.1.13. Preparing to serve or serving as a ENGINEER or witness for OWNER in any litigation, arbitration, or other legal or administrative proceeding involving the Project. 2.1.14. Revisions, additions, and changes to design(s) due to citizen advisory or oversight groups will be an additional service. 2.1.15. Additional right-of-way survey and real estate acquisition services beyond the specified number of 49 parcels in the basic services. Rates for real estate services for eminent domain are shown in Attachment B. 2.1.16. Construction staking. 2.2. Required Additional Services. When required by the Contract Documents in circumstances beyond the ENGINEER's control, the ENGINEER shall furnish or obtain from others, as circumstances require during construction and without waiting for specific authorization from OWNER, Additional Services of the types listed in paragraphs 3.2.1 through 3.2.6, inclusive. These services are not included as part of Basic Services. The ENGINEER shall advise OWNER promptly after starting any such Additional Services, which will be paid for by OWNER. Southlake Task Order 01.doc Page 16 of 25 1 OC-25 `., — 2.2.1. Services in connection with work directive changes and change orders to reflect changes requested by OWNER if the resulting change in compensation for Basic Services is not commensurate with the additional services rendered. 2.2.2. Services in making revisions to Drawings and Specifications occasioned by the acceptance of substitutions proposed by Contractor(s); and services after the award of each contract in evaluating and determining the acceptability of an unreasonable or excessive number of substitutions proposed by Contractor. 2.2.3. Services resulting from significant delays, changes or price increases occurring as a direct or indirect result of material, equipment, or energy shortages. 2.2.4. Additional or extended services during construction made necessary by (1) work damaged by fire or other cause during construction, (2) a significant amount of defective or neglected work of any Contractor, (3) acceleration of the progress schedule involving services beyond normal working hours, and (4) default by any Contractor. - 2.2.5. Services (other than Basic Services during the Operational Phase) in connection with any partial utilization of any part of the Project by OWNER prior to Substantial Completion. 1%41 -.w- 2.2.6. Evaluating an unreasonable or extensive number of claims submitted by Contractor(s) or others in connection with the Contractor's construction work. 2.2.7 Preparation of Federal Emergency Management Agency submittals, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Section 404 Permit submittals, and Environmental Protection Agency storm water permit documents will be additional services. Section B. - Schedule The Engineer shall perform the Services and deliver the related Documents (if any) according to the following schedule: This term for Basic Engineering, GEC, and Resident Project Representation Services defined within this Task Order shall extend through the Traffic Management Bond program (defined as period of 42 months from the Agreement date of September 1999). The term for said services may be extended upon agreement by OWNER and the ENGINEER. Proposed Program schedule is shown as Attachment C. Section C. - Compensation C. 1. In return for the performance of the foregoing obligations, Owner shall pay to the Engineer the shown amounts payable according to the following terms: Southlake Task Order 01.doc Page 17 of 25 1 OC-26 Mks C. La. Engineering design, urban planning, survey and preliminary geotechnical investigation for the listed intersection and trails improvements to be provided as four contract packages for a Lump Sum Amount of $1,869, 000. C.l.b. Public relations services Not -to -Exceed Amount of S 150,000. C. Lc Right -of -Way survey and real estate services for 49 parcels Not -to -Exceed Amount of S 196,000. C.1.d. Res,�_I=. Project Representation Services for On -site observation and field staff Not -to -Exceed Amount of S 552,000. Total Lump Sum Amount S 1,869,000 Total Not -to -Exceed Amount S 898,000 Total Contract Amount S 2,767,000 Lump sum amount to be paid in monthly payments which shall not exceed the percent work complete. Not -to -Exceed amount shall paid as actual monthly expenditures of total billable labor and billable expenses. C.2. Compensation for Additional Services (if any) shall be paid by Owner to Engineer according to the following terms: C.2.a. Additional Engineering, urban planning, survey or geotechnical services shall be negotiated on a case by case basis as scope of needed services are identified. C.2.b. Additional survey and/or real estate services for additional parcels shall be negotiated as needed per the base contract amount. C.2.c. Additional real estate services for eminent domain shall utilize rates shown in Attachment B. Southlake Task Order 01.doc 10C-27 Page 18 of 25 "' C.2.d. Additional resident project representation services shall be negotiated on an as needed basis per the base contract amount. Section D. - Owner's Responsibilities Owner shall perform and/or provide the following in a timely manner so as not to delay the Services of Engineer. Unless otherwise provided in this Task Order, Owner shall bear all costs incident to compliance with the following: Provide copy of Tree Ordinance; plats and plans of developments in project areas; City standards and design details; contact list for franchise utilities; City GPS benchmark system information; parcel base map; City contour maps of project area. Section E. - Other Provisions The parties agree to the following provisions with respect to this specific Task Order: None. Except to the extent modified herein, all terms and conditions of the Agreement shall continue in full force and effect. Owner: By: Signature: Title: Date: Southlake Task Order 01.doc Engineer: HNTB Corporation By: Signature: IOG-28 Title: Date: Page 19 of 25 ATTACHMENT A TO Task Order No. 1 DUTIES, RESPONSIBILITIES AND LIMITATIONS OF AUTHORITY OF THE RESIDENT PROJECT REPRESENTATIVE ENGINEER shall furnish a Resident Project Representative (RPR), assistants and other field staff to assist OWNER and/or ENGINEER as requested and agreed to for each Program Project in inspecting performance of the work of Contractor. Through more extensive on -site observations of the work in progress and field checks of materials and equipment by the RPR and assistants, ENGINEER shall provide further protection for OWNER against defects and -deficiencies in the work of Contractor. - The duties and responsibilities of the RPR are limited to those of ENGINEER in ENGINEER's Agreement with OWNER and in the construction Contract Documents, and are further limited and described as follows: A. General RPR is the ENGINEER's agent at the site, will act as directed by and under the supervision of the ENGINEER, and will confer with the ENGINEER regarding RPR's actions. RPR's dealings with matters pertaining to the on -site work shall in general be with the ENGINEER and Contractor keeping OWNER advised as necessary. RPR's dealings with subcontractors shall only be through or with the full knowledge and approval of Contractor. B. Duties and Responsibilities of RPR 1. Schedules: On a monthly basis review the progress schedule, schedule of Shop Drawing submittals and schedule of values prepared by Contractor and consult with the PROJECT MANGER concerning acceptability. 2. Conferences and Meetings: Attend meetings with Contractor, such as pre -construction conferences, monthly progress meetings (maximum 36 meeting), job conferences and other project -related meetings, and prepare and circulate copies of minutes thereof. 3. Liaison: a. Serve as the ENGINEER's liaison with Contractor, working principally through Contractor's superintendent and assist in understanding the intent of the Contract Southlake Task Order 01.doc 10C-29 Page 20 of 25 Documents; and assist the ENGINEER in serving as OWNER'S liaison with Contractor when Contractor's operations affect OWNER'S on -site operations. b. Assist in obtaining from OWNER additional details or information, when required for proper execution of the Work. 4. Shop Drawings and Samples: a. Record date of receipt of Shop Drawings and samples. b. Receive samples, which are furnished at the site by Contractor, and notify the ENGINEER of availability of samples for examination. C. Advise the ENGINEER and Contractor of the commencement of any Work requiring a Shop Drawing or sample if the submittal has not been approved by the ENGINEER. 5. Review- of Work, Rejection of Defective Work, Inspections and Tests: a. Conduct on -site observations of the Work in progress to assist the ENGINEER in determining if the Work is in general proceeding in accordance with the Contract Documents. b. Report to the ENGINEER whenever RPR believes that any Work is unsatisfactory, faulty or defective or does not conform to the Contract Documents, or has been damaged, or does not meet the requirements of any inspection, test or approval required to be made; and advise the ENGINEER of Work that RPR believes should be corrected or rejected or should be uncovered for observation, or requires special testing, inspection or approval. C. Verify that tests, equipment and systems startups and operating and maintenance training are conducted in the presence of appropriate personnel, and that Contractor maintains adequate records thereof; and observe, record and report to the ENGINEER appropriate details relative to the test procedures and startups. d. Accompany visiting inspectors representing public or other agencies having jurisdiction over the Project, record the results of these inspections and report to the ENGINEER. 6. Interpretation of Contract Documents: Report to the ENGINEER when clarifications and interpretations of the Contract Documents are needed and transmit to Contractor clarifications and interpretations as issued by the ENGINEER. Southlake Task Order 01.doc Page 21 of 25 1 OC-30 7. Modifications: Consider and evaluate Contractor's suggestions for modifications in Drawings or Specifications and report with RPR's recommendations to the ENGINEER. Transmit to Contractor decisions as issued by the ENGINEER. 8. Records: a. Maintain at the job site orderly files for correspondence, reports of job conferences, Shop Drawings and samples, reproductions of original Contract Documents including all Work Directive Changes, Addenda, Change Orders, Field Orders, additional drawings issued subsequent to the execution of the Contract, the ENGINEER's clarifications and interpretations of the Contract Documents, progress reports, and other Project related documents. b. Keep daily reports, recording Contractor hours on the job site, weather conditions, measurements of units of work actually completed, data relative to questions of Work Directive Chancres, Change Orders or changed conditions, list of job site visitors, daily, activ—-s, decisions, observations in general, and specific observations in more detail as in the case of observing test procedures; and send copies to ENGINEER. C.R�.�r� nwt^iPC7 AA PC telephone numbers of all Contractors, 1%.. subcontractors and major suppliers of materials and equipment. 9. Reports: a. Furnish ENGINEER monthly reports as required of progress of the Work and of Contractor's compliance with the progress schedule and schedule of Shop Drawing and sample submittals. b. Consult with ENGINEER in advance of scheduled major tests, inspections or start of important phases of the Work. C. Draft proposed Change Orders and Work Directive Changes, obtaining backup material from Contractor and recommend to ENGINEER Change Orders, Work Directive Changes, and Field Orders. d. Report immediately to ENGINEER and OWNER upon the occurrence of any accident. 10. Payments Requests: Review applications for payment with Contractor for compliance with the established procedure for their submission and forward with recommendations to ENGINEER's Project Director or Engineer, noting particularly the relationship of the payment requested to the schedule of values, work completed and materials and equipment delivered to the site but not incorporated in the work. Southiake Task Order 01.doc Page 22 of 25 11C-31 11. Certificates, Maintenance and Operation Manuals: During the course of the Work, verify that certificates, maintenance and operation manuals and other data required to be assembled and furnished by Contractor are applicable to the items actually installed and in accordance with the Contract Documents, and have this material delivered to ENGINEER for review and forwarding to OWNER prior to final payment for the Work. 12. Completion: a. Before ENGINEER issues a Certificate of Substantial Completion, submit to Contractor a list of observed items requiring completion or correction. b. Conduct final inspection in the company of ENGINEER, OWNER, and Contractor and prepare a final list of items to be completed or corrected. C. Observe that all items on final list have been completed or corrected and make reco-- :e .dations to ENGINEER concerning acceptance. C. Limitations of Authority R?cid -nt Project Representative: 1. Shall not authorize any deviation from the contract documents or substitution of materials or equipment, unless authorized by ENGINEER's Project Director or Engineer. 2. Shall not exceed limitations of ENGINEER's authority as set forth in the Agreement or the Contract Documents. 3. Shall not undertake any of the responsibilities of Contractor, subcontractors or Contractor's superintendent. 4. Shall not advise on, issue directives relative to or assume control over any aspect of the means, methods, techniques, sequences, or procedures of construction unless such advice or directions are specifically required by the Contract Documents, or such means, methods, techniques, sequences or procedures of construction are specifically required by the Contract Documents. 5. Shall not advise on, issue directives regarding or assume control over safety precautions and programs in connection with the work, unless such advice or directives are specifically required by the Contract Documents, or unless such safety precaution or programs are specifically required by the Contract Documents. 6. Shall not accept Shop Drawing or sample submittals from anyone other than Contractor. Southlake Task Order 01.doc 1 OC_, , Page 23 of 25 's.aw- Skew, 7. Shall not authorize OWNER to occupy the Project in whole or in part. 8. Shall not participate in specialized field or laboratory tests or inspections conducted by others except as specifically authorized by ENGINEER. Southiake Task Order 01.doc 1 OC_33 Page 24 of 25 1% . N%,, ATTAC) BIENT B TO Task Order No. 1 Additional real estate services for eminent domain shall utilize rates shown below: Condemnation Process Preparation of "Final Offer Letter" and Package $250.00 per parcel Appraisal Updates $ 75.00 per parcel Court Exhibits $150.00 per exhibit MAI testimony, pre-trial conferences, preparation $150.00 per hour Negotiator testimony $100.00 per hour Coordinator for Court/witnesses $250.00 per parcel Does not include attorney services which can be provided by the Owner or the Engineer. Southiake Task Order 01.doc 1OC-34 Page 25 of 25 W J Ct w x U U) F U w a c 0 N N C OI C O 0 C C C 0� O fQ C _ N Q f6 C_ C N N N 0 N U O O O> C N p N T I- O O° o N- 0 O Y OC 0 0 U F- Q C C 0 C 0 Of O O c6 N N � N C C jp C C a p O C `p O O U U N °1 O p U U E 2) O a3i , 0 5 C)m .5 a` 2 ii m 1 OC-35 m O O cc > p •- O N N C U CL y rn c j ) C U p p 0 N C C O D � COQ a v LL U U i0 Ch w c� a` w Y Q J 70 N 0 a F u