The URL can be used to link to this page

1994-04-05 CC Packet City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM `�•r March 31, 1994 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council FROM: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager SUBJECT: Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest for City Council Meeting April 5, 1994 1. Agenda Item No 5A. Appointment of Lisa Hendrix to Southlake Fire Reserve. Note from Director Campbell's memo that our Fire Reserve staff will increase to 8 members. 2. Agenda Items No 5B and 5C. Joint Utilization Agreements between C.O.S. and C.I.S.D. The agreements cover projects previously approved by the City Council and the C.I.S.D. Board of Trustees. The City portion of the projects are funded through the Special Revenue Funds (Park Dedication Fees). Note that the first agreement (5B) is the umbrella agreement for park, playground, and recreational facilities. The second (5C) is the specific agreement pertaining to the two projects at Carroll Intermediate School--the multi-use outdoor court and the baseball field. There is a not-to-exceed budget amount of $49,157 in Section 2 of the Joint Utilization Agreement (Item 5C). This is the cost submitted by the successful bidders. This agreement was approved by the J.U.C. at its last meeting March 8th. There will be another agreement forthcoming concerning the joint use gymnasium at the middle school approved by the JUC, SPDC, City Council, and School Board. 3. Agenda Item No. 5D. Award of Bid for Drainage Improvements. The low bid for the improvements was submitted by Wright Construction at $168,730. The next low bidder was at $180,215. Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest March 31, 1994 Page 2 Note: There are two (2)remaining R.O.W. purchases to be completed. We will discuss these in executive session Tuesday night. 4. Agenda Item No. 5E. Award of Bid for reconstruction of North Carroll Avenue and South Kimball Avenue. Note in the memo from Bob Whitehead, Director of Public Works, that the funding for the South Kimball Project "is available." Staff disseminated to City Council a preliminary budget in December concerning possible funding sources for the Kimball realignment south of F.M. 1709, the extension of Kimball between S.H. 114 and F.M. 1709, plus the extension of sewer to the Wal-mart site. This would be accomplished through a combination of shifting funds, looking again at the project priorities, and borrowing from the fund balance. Recall that the issue of the closing of Short Avenue was not included in the approved FY 93-94 Budget. Obviously the Wal-mart opportunity was not included. We will look again at the funding alternatives during the mid-year review agenda item. For purposes of this item, it is sufficient to note that funding is available. 5. Agenda Items 5F, 5G, and 5H are authorizing contracts for professional services: • 5F. Cheatham and Associates, engineering services for drainage channel and roadway entry to Bicentennial Park from F.M. 1709. • 5G. Dunnaway and Associates, engineering services for reconstruction of White Chapel Boulevard from S.H. 114 to Big Bear Creek. • 5H. Rady and Associates, engineering services for reconstruction of Dove Road from White Chapel to Kimball Road. Note we are recommending using consulting engineers other than Cheatham on two of the projects. As discussed with City Council previously, we feel this is in the best Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest. March 31, 1994 Page 3 interest of the City given the number of projects underway. We sent out RFPs and received three proposals; all three firms were interviewed. We believe Dunnaway and Rady will do excellent work. The fact that we are still utilizing Cheatham indicates we are happy with his work also. It is strictly a matter of project management. 6. Agenda Item No. 5I. Resolution No. 94-16, extending deadline to review the rates submitted by our cable operator, will allow us time to review the text of the revised rate regulation rules issued by the FCC on February 21, 1994. The extension in-and-of itself does not obligate the City to take any action, but does allow for action if deemed necessary. 7. Agenda Item No. 6A. Public Forum. We anticipate an appearance at public forum from Jean Buzzard, owner of Lot 6. Block 1 of Trail Creek Addition. (See letter from Ms. Buzzard and plat exhibit attached to this memo.) Ms. Buzzard is going to discuss her desire for the City to abandon the 50' R.O.W. between her lot and Lot 16, Block 2. She has said that the other owner also wants to abandon the R.O.W. The owner of Lot 16 has an existing gravel driveway within the R.O.W. and this is their access to a rear garage. The Buzzards also have a rear garage which u ey would like to access via a common driveway with the Lot 16 owners. Staff does not have a problem with the future roadway R.O.W. abandonment due to the large creek west of this addition and the fact that the property to the west is platted as Cedar Oaks Estates. We will need to retain a drainage and utility easement for an existing water line and storm drain within the R.O.W., and it needs to be officially noted that if any paved flatwork (driveway, etc.) or gravel drive needs to be dug up for the maintenance of the water line or drain pipe, it will be the responsibility of the property owner to repair the drive. Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest March 31, 1994 Page 4 8. Agenda Item No. 7A. Ordinance No. 480-115, 2nd Reading (ZA 94-17). Recall that City Council on first reading approved the Concept Plan as submitted by the developer, deleting the staff comment #1 on the review summary. 9. Agenda Item No. 8A. Ordinance No. 480-111 (ZA 94-14) and Item No. 8B, ZA (94-15) are the First Readings of the Rezoning and Development Plan, and the Preliminary Plat, of Lonesome Dove Estates. Note in the memo from Karen Gandy, Zoning Administrator, that as of this afternoon, there is no longer a requirement of a super- majority to approve the requested change. Since last meeting, the developer has reduced the number of lots from 161 to 152. He has verbally committed to 2100 sq. ft. minimum house size. All other commitments and park issues remain the same as of this writing. 10. Agenda Item No. 8C. Ordinance No. 578, 1st. Reading, Wrecker and Towing Ordinance. This ordinance is identical to the discussion item presented to City Council February 15, with the exception of deletion of references to storage of vehicles. Please call Director Campbell if you have questions prior to the meeting. 11. Agenda Item No. 9A. Resolution No. 94-15. Proposing annexation of 0.361 acres of land on West Dove. This property is being annexed with the knowledge of the Town of Westlake. Westlake approached the City of Southlake with the suggestion that we annex the property, which is in the Westlake ETJ, in order to address the problem of the trailer house on the site and the discharge of septic waste into the creek. 12. Agenda Item No. 10A. Developer Agreement for Timber Lake. This item is substantially the same as submitted to City Council and tabled, on February 15th. The item was tabled after questions raised by City Council concerning Country Walk and the park dedication requirements. 5 Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest March 31, 1994 Page 5 The memory of the City Council members February 15th was correct. Country Walk included the open space in the preliminary plat for the subdivision in order to address the concern of the overflights from Goode Airport. The plat did not specify whether the open space would be for public or private use, however, during the presentation to City Council on August 21, 1990, Craig Curry indicated the open space could be used for public park. The property has not been final platted. If the airport goes away, there would be no need for the open space and it could be possible for the developers to request the reduction of the open space. The dedication of property off-site of the Timber Lake Addition to satisfy park dedication requirements is permitted in the ordinance, indeed, in some cases encouraged. The 5.3 acres proposed to be dedicated is greater than would be required by both Timber Lake Phase III (now phase III & IV) and Country Walk. Since last presentation before CitX Council February 15, the developer has agreed to install certain improvements on the property. 13. Agenda Items 11A. 11B, and 11C are discussion items. There are no packet materials for 11B and 11C other than the audit report included in your packet. Concerning Agenda Item No. 11B. Presentation of Annual Audit. Lou Ann Heath, Finance Director, and Jerry Gaither, Partner, Weaver and Tidwell, will review the audit report. Note the auditor's comments in the management letter concerning the classification of expenditures and agency funds. Note also the letter from Lou Ann Heath in response to the auditor's comments. Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest March 31, 1994 Page 6 The comments concerning classification of expenditures centers upon one transaction. A capital asset was incorrectly charged against the wrong line item. We have had tight controls in place for three years. The directors and the finance staff are very conscientious in adhering to the policy. As Lou Ann points out in her letter, the City Charter (9.23) provides: At any time during the fiscal year the City Manager may transfer part or all of any unencumbered appropriation balance among programs within a department, division, or office and, upon written request by the City Manager, the Council may by ordinance transfer part or all of any unencumbered appropriation balance from one department, office or agency to another. This is repeated in several places in the City's Purchasing Policy. In the instance in question, the item was discussed by Director Campbell, Director Heath, and me prior to the purchase to make sure funds were available. Unfortunately, during the process the proper documentation(fund transfers) which is normally done fell through the crack. This is to my knowledge the only time this has happened in my tenure in Southlake. It is somewhat misleading to recommend "...expenditure codings be reviewed carefully to ensure proper classification of expenditures and availability of budgeted funds..." based upon one aberrant situation. Proper controls are in place. We do not spend money based upon the availability of funds, rather, on budgeted needs. We recognize, however, that the budget is a plan that may change during the course of the year due to changing needs or unanticipated service demands that must be addressed. An example of this is the Wal-Mart situation. One more point concerning the classification of expenditures. If you look on pp. 54-58 in the audit report, you will note that we "underspent" the General Fund budget by $137,897. If we were spending based upon the availability of budgeted funds, we would zero out. The audit reflects that some line items were underspent and some were Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest March 31, 1994 Page 7 overspent, which cannot be helped because of various reasons outside of our control, yet our records reflect we adhered closely to our plan. OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST 14. Miscellaneous Complaints. Three complaints some of you may have heard. • Vicious dog running loose in Monticello. Terry Wilkinson with Monticello visited with me about a number of items pertaining to the subdivision. One item of concern is a neighborhood complaint about a vicious chow dog which the owner is unable to keep inside the fenced yard. According to Mr. Wilkinson, the neighborhood is afraid to use the neighborhood open space due to fear of the dog, and the neighborhood believes the City has been unresponsive to the complaint. The dog in question attacked a dog on a leash on 3/21/94 (see attached report). The leashed animal died the following morning. On 3/22/94, the owner came by the station to file a complaint. Police were called on 3/28/94 concerning the same dog running loose. Police were dispatched when the call came in at 12:27 and arrived on the scene at 12:36 (9 minutes). This time is not unusual for a non-emergency call. (The complainant, or someone, told Wilkinson it took 30 minutes to respond.) No animal was found running loose. Police stopped by and visited with the owner of the dog at his residence. The owner has indicated a willingness to cooperate. He told police he was out of town when the animal got loose. The point is that although we have responded in a timely fashion, some in the neighborhood believe the City has been unresponsive. We are aware of the problem, and are doing everything the law allows. Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest March 31, 1994 Page 8 If you get calls, or if it comes up in a meeting, the upshot to the situation is that it will be resolved, i.e., the owner of the dog will restrain the dog or it will be removed. The citation (complaint) will work its way through the system. • Complaint from Mr. Holstein, 1201 Oakwood Trail, concerning disruption of gas service on 3/30/1994. Bob Whitehead, Director of Public Works, was called by DPS communications at 21:15 (9:15 p.m.) hours. (DPS received the call from Holstein on 911. Bob spoke with Holstein, who was very upset because he said he had no gas or electricity and wanted it fixed immediately. In checking out the complaint, Bob found that our contractor, Bil-Mik, in relocating the 12" water line on Continental, cut the gas line in the right-of-way sometime after 5:00 p.m. The line was not marked by Lone Star Gas. Lone Star was called immediately, and they responded in 40 minutes. The line was repaired at approximately 19:30 hours (7:30 p.m.). Lone Star told us they were unable to turn the gas on inside the residence because no one was home at the time. Bob asked them to send someone out to turn on the gas in the home. He then called the Holsteins and Mrs. Holstein answered. She said only tie gas was off. Bob informed her that a crew was on its way. She also said she had been home all the while. At 21:43 hours (9:43 p.m.) the crew was on site to turn on the gas. • Complaint from Mr. Underhill, Bass Drive, West Beach. Mr. Underhill called Bob Whitehead at 13:05 hours (1:05 p.m.) 3/30/94 and requested that we maintain Bass Drive. Bob told Mr. Underhill that we could not maintain a private road. Mr. Underhill told Bob that he was starting a petition to have West Beach "taken back" by the County, and that he was contacting his lawyer. 15. West Beach Update. Shana Rice, Assistant City Manager, and I had lunch with Jan Littlejohn yesterday 3/30/94 to discuss his property at West Beach. Littlejohn indicated Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest March 31, 1994 Page 9 he would be willing to sell his property to the City on a note to be paid out over a 5-year period. We will discuss in executive session Tuesday night. 16. Police patrol FYI. Director Campbell met with Tom Martin, Police Chief, Grapevine, this past week to discuss issues concerning the two cities. They meet periodically for this purpose. Chief Martin indicated to Campbell that they will be reducing their motorcycle patrol inventory from 6 to 4 vehicles. He offered to sell two to Southlake if we wanted them. Campbell is considering borrowing one motorcycle for a two week period to test the viability of their use here. We have two officers currently certified for motorcycles. If you see them on S.H. 114 or F.M. 1709, you will know the test is underway. If you do not see them soon, you'll know we decided to discard the idea. This appears to be an opportunity to test the idea without much cost, and we have considered it for several years now. We kept putting the idea off until F.M. 1709 was finished. 17. F.M. 1709 Update. According to TxDOT, F.M. 1709 is scheduled to have traffic on all lanes in 2-3 weeks. By mid-May all cleanup, signage, seeding, etc., should be done and the project officially completed. (See attached memo from Director Campbell.) 18. Director's Retreat. Last Friday and Saturday, March 25-26, Shana Rice, Billy Campbell, Lou Ann Heath, Greg Last, Bob Whitehead, and myself participated in a team building workshop at the Garrett Creek Ranch Executive Conference Center outside Paradise, Texas (near Bridgeport). FYI, a copy of the workshop agenda is attached, along with information on the facilitator. The retreat is the first step in developing the strategic plan for the organization which we discussed during my review last February 1st. We are working on the plan for the organization to present to City Council in the June retreat. All of us believe the workshop was a major success, and we are eager to continue the QW process. 19. Reminder: Team Focus meeting April 7th 6:00 - 10:00 p.m. (See map attached.) Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest March 31, 1994 Page 10 20. Reminder: Great Texas Trash-Off, Saturday, April 9. See notice in your packet. 21. Included in your packet is a copy of the latest citizens newsletter. 22. Attached hereto is a copy of the list of delinquent taxpayers. 23. Permit Count. As of 5:00 today, we ended the month with 45 Single Family residential permits and 33 pool permits. Jean notes this is the largest number of pool permits issued in one month by the City. 24. Reference construction of Brook Forest Drive N. Randol Mill at Kin s The developer is installing a third lane on N. Randol Mill. The base material is in place and is curing. The asphalt will be placed soon. The third lane will become the south bound lane. The existing south bound lane will be the center turn land for both Brook Forest Drive and Kingswood. Completion should be within two weeks. 25. FYI. At approximately 6:20 this evening Sandy was carried to the hospital with chest pains. That's all we know at this time. We'll let you know if it turns out to be more than simple discomfort. 26. City Hall will be closed tomorrow, April 1, in observance of Good Friday. XCEH/kb r March 30, 1994 RECEIVED To: Michael H. Barnes MAR 3 1 1994 Public Works Director CITY SECRETAR City of Southlake Southlake, Texas Re: Abandonment of R.O.W. ItI S P os i C �� 1�, . 1 This letter constitutes our request for abandonment of fight of Way on a piece of property located between 1500 Post Oak Trail andCommonly known as Trail Creek R.O.W. Originally planned as a street, both driveways on said properties exit to the R.O.W. and access to these driveways is over a dirt and gravel path developed over time. This path throws up great amounts of dirt when dry and becomes a muddy mess when wet effecting the whole neighborhood and making an unexceptable situation. The city has indicated that they no longer have plans to build a street on the R.O.W. It is the desire of both parties to build a concrete driveway over the R.O.W. in order to access our homesteads to the street. We ask you to consider the following ,. options: Option I: Our first option would be to leave the status of the R.O.W. unchanged and ask for City approval to build a concrete driveway on the R.O.W. to connect both driveways with the street. Option II: Our second option would be for the City to abandon the R.O.W. The two owners of the adjacent property would purchase the property and dedicate a drainage and utility easements over the storm drain and water lines respectively. Any other options that the City staff might have to help us resolve our problems would be greatly appreciated. Thank you, ©C) _S 7�a z ,� N 890 29'E 850.78, - tarvrrun -_--- -_-_ _- 2oase-----i ---- �-----� 1 — z000' 1 200;' I + LOCK 1 '�! h�J ❑ oil 1 1 0°� ! 1 i 3 �I i E ,¢OF CREEK `\ 1 �iit 2 11 o M 11 •�O �\�� ' Ab I � al r 144.e1' 1 1 3z.deuttaNc I1 _� 1412 rol.s�' 11 200d 1 2000' o°i+ 5 •`t TRAIL R w H`et a 109.TS 2000' 2000r 32jou/0.0M1O8 d 4s was•HY---- ---- - �' 3 $I 1 o - 1 1 O o 30999• a'Eedui.___ R-2 i R—, � • � i � Net-WE 1 `l) 9 M N_ gllZZq�DS �\1 R-4I ~ 331.19• a'+m�n� uaEwEwr 1 , _ -....-Y t! _ h :` RAW.DEOICATED FOR FUTURE STREET ��---- 200D d ••�- o ' 11 200A' • W DRARIME EISEMEM — QR-5 — I tdeu�Dm6 uNE Ri i 1/6 m)\ r 0- I Ij« R`7 ----------- s 3 �I 355.46• —_—aYn7•a__r— 1 ...� 1 ' BLOCK ,: Q CYFfiFcc CREEK CR. - --to .; ..•►tt ...,>e /G Z"� �'� ��/ \�F` `\�- - :n •. '1 �� tls t� n ' J vl Iftal al ; PI '+ ;+ IN + ; )4-� O M-col= cn 1 -- _-21'1 Se_ � 10-9 - In v m 399.23 av G wo BELT "WIVE ` 73 / ti-.t V m 7 BLOCK 2❑ " I 1/ • a I It zeo.o' I 200D zoo.d —__ _ 450.0• __ - 1 ----- --- -----�L------- ---------- --- S 89.4VW 1�0.01 . 10.UTILITY CASEMENT �u 1 j A . r ' �.� ' �� •��• u _ •III:/ r � Elm I my M On 2 1 Ad 0 � r memo- 1111WA► U �. M I - Lww Lam' Y ' VICIOUS DOG 940210 ON TUESDAY, 03/22/94 AT APPROX 1239 HRS, JOHN MOORE CAME TO THE SDPS AND REPORTED A PROBLEM WITH A VICIOUS DOG. OFFICER MATT CLARK #153 MET WITH MOORE. JOHN MOORE REPORTED THAT ON 03/21/94, APPROX 1630 HRS, ANN MOORE (HIS WIFE) WAS WALKING THEIR 14 YEAR OLD FAMILY DOG (WHI/BRO BEAGLE MIX) ON A LEASH AROUND THE WALKWAY AT THE MONTICELLO HOUSING DEVELOPMENT. AS ANN MOORE WALKED ON THE PATH, A LARGE BLK CHOW DOG RAN FROM 1410 S WHITE CHAPEL AND ATTACKED THEIR DOG. ANN MOORE MANAGED TO GET THE TWO DOGS APART, ONLY AFTER HER DOG WAS SERIOUSLY INJURED. ANN MOORE THEN CARRIED HER DOG HOME TO 603 POTOMAC PL. WHILE ON THE WAY HOME, THE INJURED DOG BIT ANN MOORE ON HER HAND. MOORE TOOK THE DOG TO A VETERINARIAN WHERE IT WAS KEPT OVERNIGHT. THE DOG DIED ON THE MORNING OF 03/22/94. THE MOORE'S REQUESTED TO FILE CHARGES ON THE OWNER OF THE BLACK CHOW, JERRY BECK ( 1410 S WHITE CHAPEL) DUE TO THE BLACK CHOW BEING LOOSE AND OBVIOUSLY VICIOUS. OFFICER CLARK ESCORTED JOHN MOORE TO THE CITY COURT CLERK'S OFFICE, WHERE HE SIGNED A COMPLAINT. THE CITY COURT CLERK REQUESTED THAT AN OFFENSE REPORT BE GENERATED ON THIS INCIDENT. 317 1410 South White Chapel ( :HOW DOG) 03/22/94 Vicious Dag Report 940210 03/22/94 One ( 1 ) citation issued out of court clerk for dog at large 03/28/94 Stray Dog MIR 404582 03/28/94 Fallow up MIR 404598 03/28/94 One ( 1) citation issued out of court clerk for dog at large. 03/30/94 Dir . Bedrich spoke with Mr . Beck at great length He indicated that he will do everything with his power to ensure the animal does not ' free range. If unable to do so, Mr Beck understands the animal will have to be removed from the city. is a ;v The Evans Group Training and Development Consultants Dear Participant: We are delighted that you will be participating in the upcoming Building Leaders and Teams. In an effort to assist us in preparing for this session,we ask you to complete the enclosed pre-work materials. Enclosed you will find: • Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (Booklet&Scoresheet) • Organizational Climate Survey • Organizational Challenges • Workshop Expectations As part of the workshop,you will be participating in an outdoor challenge course. You will be challenged both physically and intellectually. Please be assured that this is "challenge by choice." Each of you will be encouraged to attempt each activity,but not forced to participate. Needless to say, attire is casual. We recommend loose fitting clothes and tennis shoes(i.e.,jeans,shorts,sweats,shirts that canbe tucked in,shoes that tie and no jewelry). In preparation for the day, we also need you to complete the enclosed: *4%W • Medical Information • Release of Liability Please return the completed pre-work to us by March 15. Mail to: The Evans Croup Park Central III/Suite 1504 12700 Park Central Drive Dallas,TX 75251 Thank you for your cooperation. We look forward to working with you. Best regards, William I. Evans Enclosures Park Central III/Suite 1504 12700 Park Central Drive Dallas,Tbxas 75251 (214)788-4424 FAX(214)788-4941 r r WILLIAM I. EVANS • • Bill Evans is a catalyst for change, generating new ideas. He is an educator, leader, writer, philosopher and above all, a communicator of exceptional talent. do r Mr. Evans energizes people with thought provoking concepts. His fast paced style • sprinkled with good-natured humor makes him one of the most sought after speakers • in this country. • r Mr. Evans is a graduate of the University of Illinois. He established his credentials as • a human resource training consultant during a twelve year career with IBM and • Xerox. i His corporate work includes a wide range of marketing and management assignments. While at IBM, he was a leading marketing representative. At Xerox,he directed the activities of Major Accounts Marketing. He also directed the Training Development Team that was responsible for the design and implementation of highly • innovative programs. • In 1978 he founded The Evans Group, a firm which has become recognized for its • quality and consistency of content, implementation and results. The firm works with 40 a variety of businesses including Hewlett Packard, Arthur Andersen, Frito-lay, • Chaparral Steel,and many others. • • Mr. Evans has authored numerous articles, including several innovative concepts published by The Harvard University Press. In addition to his consulting activities, he is a frequent speaker on related subjects including Visionary Leadership, Group Development and The Centered Executive. He is active in a variety of professional • organizations and is the past President of Sales and Marketing Executives of Dallas. 41 • • • • • 40 i • • • r • ii • PROGRAM OBJECTIVES 1. To improve communication among team members 2. To increase trust and respect among team members 3. To increase cooperation and support among team members 4. To identify major challenges or obstacles that interfere with the team's effectiveness 5. To consider the nature of those challenges 6. To prioritize the most urgent and important barriers and identify a pathway toward their resolution. 7. To validate the city's mission through a consensus process. 8. To identify the Critical Success Factors and Major Organizational Processes neces- sary to accomlish the mission. 9. To prioritize those Factors and Processes based upon commitment by all with ac- countability by one. r 1 AGENDA DAY 11:00 AM Arrival and Check-In 12:00 PM Lunch 1:00 PM Low Ropes Challenge Course Introduction • Warm-up 6i 1:30 PM Challenge Course • Element#1 • Activity • Team Debrief—Implications and Transfer to Workplace E E 2:30 PM Challenge Course • Elements#2 &3 F 3:30 PM Break 3:45 PM Challenge Courseco • Elements#4 &5 F Co 5:30 PM Renewal Time 6:00 PM Beverages 6:30 PM Dinner 7:30 PM Communication—The Evans System 0 • How You Make Your Decisions (r • HowYou Implement Your Decisions 0 • How You Engage People and Tasks (� • How Others See You Implications —How It Applies to This Team Fi 10:00 PM Adjourn F l� I -2 AGENDA DAY 7:00 AM Breakast 8:00 AM Organizational Climate Survey • Presentation of Results • Discussion of Implications Team Challenges • Intra Team Exchange of Challenges • Discussions • Pathways to Resolution 9:30 AM Break 9:45 AM Validating the Mission WWI 10:15 AM Identifying the Critical Success Factors (CSFs) to Achieve the Mission--Teams 12:00 PM Lunch 1:00 PM Establishing the Major Organizational Processes (MOPs) 3:30 PM Ranking the CSFs/MOPs 4:00 PM Summary and Wrap-Up 4:30 PM Adjourn _ I-3 City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM March 31, 1994 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Billy Campbell, Director, Department of Public Safety SUBJECT: Evaluation of Motor Patrol for Southlake There is a possibility within the next couple of weeks that we will have the availability of a motor from the Grapevine Police Department. This motor would be utilized by our personnel for the evaluation of a motor patrol for traffic purposes in the City of Southlake. We currently have two experienced motor officers, but probably will elect to have Sgt. Daniels participate in the program. The objectives of the program is to evaluate the feasibility of a motor patrol. There currently are some perceived needs that we need to evaluate, such as the opening of F.M. 1709, school zones, and other areas where we receive complaints and it is impractical to put a four-wheel traffic unit. Sgt. Daniels worked motors for four years in Amarillo. His assignment will be to report and validate all the positive and negatives of a motor patrol for the City and to recommend policies and procedures if we choose to move in this direction. Here again, the emphasis is being placed on the feasibility and practicality of a motor unit for Southlake. The program will be evaluated for at least 30, and possibly 60 days. We will address the program in our current four-day shifting pattern and at the end of each four-day shifting pattern, Sgt. Daniels will submit a synopsis and evaluation of the program to Director Bedrich. At the end of the 60 days, Sgt. Daniels will provide an overall summary of the experience. We are currently working out the agreement with the City of Grapevine for the use of their motor. I am available for any questions or comments that you might have. BC/mr wpWv wWotorPat.Evl FIELDING, BARRETT & TAYLOR, L.L.P. ATTORNEYS 3400 BANK ONE TOWER 500 THROCKMCRTON STREET FORT WORTH,TEXAS 76102-3821 (4we TELEPHONE(817)332-2580 FAX(817)3324740 TERRI HALE Legal Assistant March 15, 1994 Ms. Lou Ann Heath Director of Finance City of Southlake 667 N. Carroll Avenue Southlake, TX 76092 RE: Southlake Delinquent Taxes Dear Lou Ann: Attached is a copy of the Southlake Descending Tax Roll. This list comprises all delinquent tax accounts and includes penalties and interest accrued through February, 1994. (W Also enclosed is a status report of the accounts owing more than $1000.00. Many of these are 1993 taxes that just became delinquent February 1, 1994. In the status report I have noted for each account whether there is a lawsuit pending, bankruptcy filed, if the City will be filing suit shortly, or any other relevant information regarding that account. Additionally, I have been calling certain taxpayers to advise them that we will be filing suit unless the taxes are paid. We are also in the process of ascertaining lienholders so that we can inform them of the delinquent taxes owed. Calling delinquent taxpayers and notifying lienholders is often more effective than filing suit. If you have any questions, please feel free to give me or Betsy a call. Since , Terri Hale Legal Assistant to Betsy Elam TH:mjw Enclosure f.\f iles\mu ni\slake\letters\heath0041tr CITY OF SOUHTLAKE updated 3/15/94 DELINQUENT TAX STATUS LIST OWNER TAXES OWED STATUS INCLUDING P&I-AF as of February 1994 Interlock Pavers, Inc. 15,341.34 Personal property from 1984 to 1987. Corporation no longer in existence. Robert W. Miron 13,237.96 Bankruptcy - 93 taxes A.C. Stone 13,071.72 5 accounts - '93 taxes 3 accounts - AG rollback Aubrey Smith 11,676.38 Lawsuits pending E07124-92 and E07061-92 (fact witness re: Johnson flooding) kw Littlejohn 11,660.42 WEST BEACH Jinks Jones (J.D. Jones) 11,176.14 Petition Preparation in Progress Mike W. Robertson 9,500.29 No suit pending Bailey Hydraulics, Inc. 9,157.00 Bankruptcy C. Farina 7,218.32 WEST BEACH Rick Stacy 7,199.25 Bankruptcy Stephen C. Kidwell 6,997.57 Mr. Kidwell satisfied the tax amounts due on account #6195717. However, this account is still delinquent (lawsuit?) Southlake JV 6,960.11 There are six properties in total. Three in care of Drews Realty Group. Three other properties '93 taxes only. Drews promised payment. Aubrey L. Smith 6,909.48 Lawsuits E07124-92 E07061-92 f.\files\muni\slakc\deltaz\statuL st updated 3/15/94 J.D. Jones 6,617.00 Judgment, January 19, 1994 Bailey Hydraulics, Inc. 6,031.56 Lawsuit L-11116-93 South Kimball Ave., JV 5,708.66 South Kimball Avenue JV is a property owned by Wayne K. Lee. Defendant served July 6, 1993 Champlin Refining Co. 5,698.96 1993 taxes only. Charles Reiser 5,244.39 Taxes mailed to Asa Hamrick 2/24/94 Entek Corporation 4,450.52 Bankruptcy Jimmie C. Holley 4,445.31 Denton County Suit 92-0451-16 '93 taxes only JBM Development Corp. 4,443.47 Lawsuit, Defendant V. J. Strand Excavating #E06258-92 (W Robert L. Strand 4,401.33 '93 taxes only Gary Houdek 4,104.67 County boundary split dispute Don and Patricia Burnett 4,048.28 Lawsuit L-10599-93 Ralph G. Hopkins 3,801.98 Lawsuits (Elms Investments) Lee K. Wayne 37571.72 Tax Suit L10487-93 - Southlake Intervention October, 1993. Stanley Jordan 3,486.48 Taxes to be paid in March First International Bank 3,374.56 Bankruptcy of Bedford Russell Oxner 3,327.19 '93 taxes Bonita Almon 3,239.19 193 taxes Fishel Construction Co. 3,181.46 V.J. Strand lawsuit Roger Strand 3,151.88 February 18 paid $1,061.06 and are presently on installment plan. (There are two accounts) f:\files\muni\slak"eltax\status.lst Y ' updated 3/15/94 J.M. Shelton 3,104.89 '93 taxes Pumpco, Inc. 2,981.47 Personal Property '89 The Yerkey Co. 2,967.15 Judgment 8/27/92 Omni Investments, Inc. 2,964.34 Lawsuit E-06311-92 Charles Smith 2,688.46 Three accounts, '93 taxes only Southridge Lakes 2,614.43 V.J. Strand Lawsuit Homeowner Verlo Strand 2,461/35 Petition preparation in progress James M. Morse 2,430.59 Petition preparation in progress Jean Rager Kelley 2,390.11 Personal property '83 + '84 James Turner 2,228.80 Installment plan *Robert W. Mussina 2,131.55 Lawsuit L-6919 and L-9169 John & Linda Moore 2,123.42 '93 taxes (to be paid in March) RTC 2,096.92 Denton County Richard A. Young 2,006.97 Denton County (J.D. Jones) William Jones 2,002.76 Petition preparation in progress Elbert R. Mitchell 1,988.99 Lawsuit E-08880-93 & L09940-92 C Kidd Plumbing 1,959.49 Lawsuit K. Wayne Lee 1,909.96 '93 taxes Waterford Properties, 1,892.67 (K. Wayne Lee) Lawsuit #E- Inc. 05873-91 Elms Investment Group 1,858.39 Lawsuit E-06660-92 Scott North 1,858.05 Petition preparation in progress Cryro Industries, Inc. 1,851.89 Petition preparation in progress Glen Tanner 1,837.83 193 taxes fAfiles\muni\slake\deltax\statusJst Kaizer, M. D & C.L. 17824.98 '93 taxes updated 3/15/94 Matche '93 taxes Gregory L. Pabich 1,823.28 '93 taxes Frederic M. Guist 17810.72 '93 taxes Donald Summers 1,804.00 Denton County Suit 90-0351-211 Ruth L. Smith 1,802.90 Judgment 7/26/91 (B&B Operating lawsuits E-07983-93 & E-08508-93 W. B. Downing 1,780.20 '93 taxes only B. Don Hastings 1,741.03 Petition preparation in progress Gaia Technologies, Inc. 1,675.74 '93 taxes Gary L. Chappell 1,657.14 Denton County H. Lee Wathan, Jr. 17628.12 Bankruptcy #390-348-38-13 Lawsuit #E-054091-90 Robert L. Taylor 1,617.15 '93 taxes Joseph G. Moore 1,585.86 '93 taxes Joseph Charbonneau 1,557.89 '93 taxes Tex Art Stone Co. 1,492.57 '93 taxes Richard Cooper 1)462.19 Bankruptcy 420-6479 487-42785-13 Joe A. Ramos, Jr. 1,438.99 '93 taxes Buddy R. Tanner 1,433.41 '93 taxes Eutectic Metals Co., Inc. 1,422.81 Lawsuit L-8874-91 Rain Forest Ltd. 1,399.39 No suit Third Coast Pursuits, Inc. 1,398.42 Bankruptcy Carl J. Smith 1,387.08 193 taxes Entek Corporation 1,362.78 Business personal property f.\files\muni\slake\deltaxlstatus.lst updated 3/15/94 Arlington State Bank 1,362.55 Petition preparation in progress Eutectic Metals Co., Inc. 1,346.17 Lawsuit E08117-93 John F. Johnson 1,342.86 '93 taxes CFD Limited Partnership 1,334.94 '93 taxes Robert & Martha Frost 1,323.52 '93 taxes William J. & Janic Spivey 1,314.20 '93 taxes Tomy L. Andrews 1,286.02 '93 taxes John Reinmiller 1,282.31 Petition preparation in progress Anthony S. Bosco 1,277.40 '93 taxes John M. Shelton 1,276.61 '93 taxes Peter Lucas 1,275.99 '93 taxes (6w Richard Letsinger 1,271.87 Petition preparation in progress J. W. Myatt, Jr. 1,268.86 Petition preparation in progress Nanette P. Lockhart 1,266.55 No suit John A. Lounsbury 1,262.51 '93 taxes Jackie Davis 1,246.89 '93 taxes David C. McMahan 1,206.54 '93 taxes Worth C. Holmes 1,205.18 . '93 taxes T.J. McHale 1,204.52 '93 taxes Marvin G. Cook 1,192.72 Petition preparation in progress Greg L. Gist 1,188.10 '93 taxes Barbara L. Smith 1,180.81 Lawsuit I19947-92 S & B Aviation Services 1,166.88 '93 taxes Robert L. Yandell 1,152.78 193 taxes f:\files\muni\slalce\deltax\status.Lct Leonard & Kris 1,145.70 '93 taxes updated 3/15/94 Resenfeld Mike L. Moore 1,139.68 '93 taxes Stanley T. Ogle 1,134.36 Judgment 2/94 Jerry D. Beck 1,132.86 '93 taxes Fast Emergency Plumbing 1,129.81 Lawsuit L-9316 Service Beverly Lewellen 1,126.58 '93 taxes Louis Messina 1,125.98 '93 taxes Ruby Slayton 1,115.39 Petition preparation in progress Prestige Gunite, Inc. 1,102.52 '93 taxes David D. Bowman 1,090.96 Petition preparation in progress William H. Garner 1, 071.94 '93 taxes Tommy G. Barnett 1,066.85 '93 taxes Suit P. C. Franks 1,066.24 '93 taxes John B. Locke 1,063.33 Lawsuit Carl R. Pagel 1,050.04 '93 taxes Aubrey L. Smith 1,046.48 '93 taxes John P. Dyer 1,037.44 '93 taxes Robert L. Petty 1,034.18 '93 taxes Leroy Sisco 1,033.86 Lawsuit E5910-91 Jane G. Miron 1,032.24 '93 taxes Lois J. Turner 1,031.16 '93 taxes Robert B. Presley 1,026.52 '93 taxes Darrell G. Fag lie 1,026.25 '93 taxes Paul Brady, Jr. 1,010.08 '93 taxes f.\files\muni\slake\deltaz\statu&lst updated 3/15/94 Davis Industrial Partners 1,001.91 '93 taxes James Stahala 1,000.44 '93 taxes (W f.\filesvnuni\slakowolta:\statuslst City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM CITY MAT4AGER March 29, 1993 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Billy Campbell, Director, Department of Public Safety SUBJECT: Appointment - Lisa A. Hendrix to Firefighter Reserve Lisa Ann Hendrix of 1921 Lilac Lane, Grapevine, has applied for Firefighter Reserve. Ms . Hendrix has worked as a Firefighter Reserve for the City of Colleyville and her husband, who is a Police Officer in Grapevine, is also a volunteer for the City of Colleyville. She has worked diligently to pass our strenuous testing procedures and has completed her doctor' s physical and drug screening. I believe that she will be a valued member of the Department, and as required by Ordinance #554, am requesting she be placed on the April 5, 1994 Council agenda for appointment by Council . By appointing Lisa to our Firefighter Reserve force this will bring our Fire Reserve strength to eight . I am available for any questions or comments that you might have. y�v 01 BC/mr � wp\Memo\LHendrix.Apt City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM MANAGER March 31, 1994 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Tom Elgin, Planner SUBJECT: Interlocal Agreements between the City of Southlake and Carroll Independent School District The Joint Utilization Committee (JUC) has approved and forwarded two interlocal agreements for consideration by City Council and Carroll Independent School District (CISD) Board of Trustees. The first agreement, Interlocal Agreement for Park, Playground and other Recreational Facilities, establishes the general framework for joint utilization projects for the mutual benefit of the City and CISD. The second agreement, Joint Utilization Agreement, sanctions two specific projects located at Carroll Intermediate School - -construction of a multi-use court and improvements to the ball field. The multi-use court will replace a deteriorating asphalt court with a regulation-sized reinforced concrete court suitable for basketball, in-line skating, and other uses. The ball field improvements include minor site grading, turf improvements, and installation of lighting and corresponding electrical system upgrades. Please place this item on the council's agenda for approval of the interlocal agreements and authorization for the two specific projects. Staff will obtain signatures upon approval. TE Attachments: Interlocal Agreement for Park, Playground and other Recreational Facilities Joint Utilization Agreement, Carroll Intermediate School Multi-use Court and Ball Field ' INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR PARK, PLAYGROUND AND OTHER RECREATION FACILITIES STATE OF TEXAS § COUNTY OF TARRANT § This Agreement is made by and between the City of Southlake, a home rule municipality, acting herein by and through its duly authorized Mayor, Gary Fickes, hereinafter referred to as the "City," and the Carroll Independent School District, a special purpose unit of government organized and acting under the laws of the State of Texas, acting herein by and through its duly authorized president of the Board of Trustees, Mike Brown, hereinafter referred to as the "District." WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the District presently maintains and operates several school campuses, athletic facilities, and playgrounds in the City and plans for more school sites, athletic facilities, and playgrounds in the City in the future; and WHEREAS, the City presently maintains and operates several parks, athletic facilities, and playgrounds and plans for more parks, athletic facilities, and playgrounds in the future; and WHEREAS, both the City and the District have determined the need for providing certain recreational facilities for schools, as well as for the general public; and WHEREAS, both the City and the District have recognized that the joint use of school recreational facilities can benefit both entities, recognizing that school properties and facilities are intended primarily for school purposes and that the educational needs of children are the highest priority; and s"9 a WHEREAS, the District, through its Board of Trustees, desires to continue to cooperate with the City, through its City Council, in the joint construction, funding, operation, maintenance and/or use of certain recreational facilities for the enjoyment and benefit of all citizens. NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual premises herein contained, the mutual benefits flowing to both the City and the District and other good and valuable consideration recited herein, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the City and the District do hereby contract, covenant, warrant and agree as follows: I. The City shall be entitled to use the District recreational properties listed on Exhibit "A" attached hereto (hereinafter referred to as the "District Property") in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement. The City shall be entitled to priority use of the District Property upon approval by the District of a schedule of City activities and programs. A schedule of City activities and programs utilizing District Property shall be submitted annually for approval to the District by the City, substantially in the same form as shown on Exhibit "B" attached hereto and incorporated herein, no later than August 15th of each year. The District shall approve the schedule as submitted, or with any modifications deemed necessary by the District, no later than September 15th of each year. The City may use the District Property for its authorized activities and programs, including use by general public, and for no other purposes. Use of the District Property by the City for activities and programs not on the approved schedule shall be allowed only if the District Property is available. b:rec.agr(03-30-94)\JUC\kb II. The user of a shared facility shall furnish and supply all consumable materials and supplies necessary for carrying out its program and shall be subject to the reasonable rules and regulations set by the respective governing body, or other designated entity, of the City and/or District. III. With respect to the District Property, the City does hereby agree, insofar as permitted by law, to indemnify, hold harmless and defend, at its sole expense, the District from any claims, damages, injuries, lawsuits, or causes of action arising out of or in any way connected with the use of the District Property for a City activity during the time the City is conducting the activity on the District Property. IV. The District shall be responsible for maintaining the District Property; provided, however, that each party agrees to pay for any damage to District Property which occurs while it is being used by that party pursuant to this Agreement. V. The District Superintendent and his or her designee and the City Manager and his or her designee are authorized to make changes to the approved schedule of activities set forth in Exhibit "B" as they may agree upon throughout the term of this Agreement. VI. The term of this Agreement shall be for a period of two (2) years beginning from the date of execution of this Agreement. This Agreement shall be automatically extended for b:rec.agr(03-30-94)\JUC\kb 3 ,5-x- additional one (1) year periods, unless terminated in writing by either party at least sixty (60) days prior to the end of the original term or any extension thereof. VII. Neither party to this Agreement shall, without first obtaining written consent of the other party, assign, pledge, or in any way encumber this Agreement, in whole or in part, or sublet the District Property or any part thereof. VIII. Nothing in this Agreement shall change or affect the duties, responsibilities, liabilities or immunities provided to the parties under the Texas Tort Claims Act, Sections 101.001 et seq., of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code. IX. The parties agree to continue to search for new areas of cooperation and to that end shall meet together regularly, along with interested community groups and appropriate City and District administrative officials. The parties will enter into separate "joint utilization agreements" for the construction, funding, operation, maintenance and/or use of City and district facilities where such activities are deemed to be in the b--st interests of the parties. Each joint utilization agreement will set forth the specific terms and conditions under which such activities are to be conducted. X. This Agreement contains all of the agreements made by and between the parties hereto regarding the use of District Property and no additional agreements or understandings shall be applicable to the use of District Property unless first agreed to, in writing, by the parties. b:rec.agr(03-30-94)\JUC\kb 4 5/ — J XI. This Agreement and all 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. In the event that a lawsuit is filed by either party arising out of the terms and provisions of this Agreement, venue for the lawsuit shall be in Tarrant County, Texas. XII. The undersigned officers of the parties are the properly authorized officials and have the necessary authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the parties. Each party hereto certifies to the other that any necessary resolutions or orders extending said authority have been duly passed and are now in full force and effect. CITY OF SOUTHLAKE By: Mayor ATTEST: City Secretary CARROLL INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT By: President, Board of Trustees ATTEST: Secretary, Board of Directors b:rw.agr(03-30-94)UUCUt 5 �56- � 4 JOINT UTILIZATION AGREEMENT CARROLL INTERMEDIATE SCHOOL MULTI-USE COURT AND BALL FIELDS STATE OF TEXAS § COUNTY OF TARRANT § This agreement is entered into by and between the City of Southlake, Texas, a home rule municipality, acting herein by and through its duly authorized Mayor, Gary Fickes, hereinafter referred to as the "City," and the Carroll Independent School District, a special purpose unit of government organized and acting under the laws of the State of Texas, acting herein by and through its duly authorized President of the Board of Trustees, Mike Brown, hereinafter referred to as the "District." WHEREAS, the City and the District have entered into an Interlocal Agreement for Park, Playground and Other Recreational Facilities which outlines the parties' goals to provide for the joint construction, funding, operation, maintenance and/or use of recreational facilities for the enjoyment and benefit of all citizens; and WHEREAS, the City and the District now desire to enter into this agreement to provide for the terms and conditions governing the installation of improvements on the multi-use court and ball fields at Carroll Intermediate School. NOW, THEREFORE, KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: 1. The District and the City hereby agree to share in the utilization of an outdoor multi use court and ball field at the Carroll Intermediate School. The District will prepare bid specifications which will be submitted to the City for approval. After approval of the bid specifications, the District is authorized to take bids for the construction of these facilities in conformity with state law. Upon receipt of bids, the District shall award a bid to the lowest responsible bidder approved by both the District and the City. All bids shall be within the budgeted guidelines prior to acceptance. The District shall be responsible for overseeing construction after the bids are let and accepted. 2. The City shall pay to the District an amount not to exceed $49,157 (lump sum for ball field/basketball court) for the cost of construction of the facilities. The City shall pay to the District at the time of presentation of an invoice, its equal share of the payments required under the construction contact. 3. The District agrees to provide all routine maintenance of the basketball court and baseball field. Maintenance, including, but not limited to, litter pick-up, shall be performed by the District during its scheduled time of utilization. 4. The District shall have priority use of the basketball court and baseball field from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m on regular school days. The City shall have priority use of these facilities at b:rewti i.agr(03-30-94)UUC\kb 2 `Ift, Jr�_z all othe-: times. The City will provide to the District a schedule of community programs for which the facilities will be utilized during the City's usage hours. 5. It is anticipated that coin meters shall be installed for the use of electrical lights on the basketball court in order to reimburse the District for electrical usage for lights. 6. If security is required or deemed necessary by either the District or the City, the costs of providing such security shall be paid by the party utilizing the facilities during the time security is provided. ..• 7. The term of this Agreement shall be for a period of five (5) years beginning from the date of execution of this Agreement. 8. This Agreement contains all of the agreements made by and between the parties hereto regarding the construction and use of the baseball field and basketball court at Carroll Intermediate School. The parties may agree from time to time, in writing, to modify any provisions regarding the sharing of maintenance expenses, repairs and other matters arising b:rcwtili.agr(03-30-94)VUC\kb 3 se- 5 pursuant to this Agreement, including alternative rights, duties, obligations and responsibilities of each parry. 9. To the extent not specifically modified by this Agreement, the use of District Property shall be governed by the Interlocal Agreement for Park, Playground and Other Recreational Facilities previously executed by the parties. Executed this day of , 1994 in Tarrant County, Texas. CITY OF SOUTHLAKE By: Mayor Gary Fickes ATTEST: City Secretary CARROLL INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT By: President, Board of Trustees ATTEST: Secretary, Board of Directors b:recutili.agr(03-30-94)UUC\kb 4 City of Southlake,Texas CITY t�A�� GEC MEMORANDUM March 30, 1994 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Bob Whitehead, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Award of Bid for Drainage Improvements on South Peytonville Avenue GENERAL INFORMATION The roadway improvements to South Peytonville have taken various steps. First, the ROW purchases are being finalized. Second, Council approved, January 18, 1994, the contract for the installation of the new water main. This contract is 90% complete. Now, the Drainage Improvements and ROW Clearing need to be contracted. City Council approved the bidding of this project at their August 17, 1993 meeting. Advertisements were published on February 6 and February 13. Bids were publically opened and read aloud on February 14, 1994 at 10:00 a.m. The last step is for Tarrant County to construct the road which is planned for July thru August 1994. BID TABULATION See attached bid tabulations prepared by Cheatham and Associates. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS None FUNDING/FISCAL IMPACT Funding for this project will be provided from the $1,500,000 Street Bond Project. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the low bid from Wright Construction Co. of Grapevine be awarded the South Peytonville Ave. Drainage Improvements and ROW Clearing Contract for $168,730. Please place this item on the Council's April 5, 1994 agenda for their consideration. 64��P- BW Attachments: Bid Tabulation Sheets wPFu.Es\MEMOS\PErrox.sID CHEATHAM AND ASSOCIATES March 29, 1994 Mr. Bob Whitehead, P.E. Director of Public Works City of Southlake 667 N. Carroll Avenue Southlake, TX 76092 Re: S. Peytonville Ave. Drainage Improvements & R.O.W. Clearing Southlake, Texas Job No. 001-212 Dear Bob: We have tabulated the bids for the subject property and the low bidder was Wright Construction with a base bid of$168,730.00. We recommend awarding the contract to the low bidder. Wright has performed well for the City, and we feel that they do a good job on this project. If you have any questions or comments, please give us a call. Respectfully, Eddie Cheatham, P.E. \drnge.wri Enclosure ENGINEERS-PLANNERS-SURVEYORS A Subsidiary Firm of 5-- 'L - lanning and Design,Inc. 1170 Corporate Drive Wes 52. 7 - Arlington,Texas 76006 817/633-1 0 640-4329 F- - O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 < _ o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 0000t0000Cioo W) N U O o O (D O O OMO tD 000 N 10O n aO IDN •- ON < tD X F- n O, CC U It m m m 7 7 ao w 0 (D M O UJ N X N N N Cl) N w w at w J = F- * w ww Nww w w < P — O O O O O O O p O O C F- : 2 N w v 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O O O W J w O w F U O o ao0 P 't ° P o 0 W < Z 3 x 0 — C' X 7 6�. v v Q U) or4n (<- < o OooO0000v (ODo 0 O O w N O O (D w V m O O (D O O (C) O (D O O O O Z P v N D r i O ) (D (D Lq O (D a0 a C 0 Y 1D O0 I- c� tD CA nCV DU r X C U N w N Q%60 ICU41 a0 w w w w w w z v CT N O W- =n x Lf) F, oe '� O o 0 0 0 0 0 h O O C P — O ry O O P N w C 7 > n O Z x ` : U O v o ry N ry c S, ox< = N .., ,., 21 1 (L ¢ m N F- O 00000000000 0 v) O O O N '7 in040000 — Z o n H 000f- �_ CD 00000 to 0 N N O (D CD (A N Y v 0 0 0 — N CD f` a0 T (3 C7 O CO (D Cl N_ "t C, �_ O) (D tD O) O) Y O f� X P sf fA N N M N 00 0 P N w N N N N N N w N ' z — C , O O O N 'D m 0 0 O O O Z < oo n �_ O O O a0 h h O O O C O w P N O ('1 vi w a0 m O O O ', Z W x CF �" U N1 O n n P rn — 0 0 0 � � W0 < F � a a (P) c > � u> <i < o 00000000000 0 _ 0 a0000000000 0 N R O F.- OOO000 0 0009 O Z vPi n ' N (D OiG Ncq - - -0700 n ex t�f Q, ap O _ O F_ F _ NO) O_ � mrCA w F- N h ;.. aO N H U N N C7 N N N tD Z ,a N w N N N N N w N Q 0 _jLd J ; u < Z ; O O O O O O O O O O O 3 �_ O O O O O O O O O O O m Z W W o0 CD HU 0 � 0a0 aNDO N O (D O O d Q O3 � 0XF'- Z0. CA � N C'') O CA — CIA b V CL LL < V O O O toO O O N N Z m Z O OD (D O m Y v co v v N W a0 Qfiu: fifi > QQ (n V ' Z d C6 w J J J J U w w J z z '- � O � o � L Q = 06 u ~ 0 N 3 m rn F- p A W W rn ~ F- C P N 0 w v F- W N W z Z� } O W Z N O ac O O_ C m h -) J = N } W "' i vUi < � � xx Of Q N F, ¢ fi w00 mz � 0 W < wo EwammJJ Ow Z F- i a < w ZYw mm X X U F- > Zapo v 4f) io2 Ddd � —1 Q =O 0 0001- F- F- F- F-W W D J x ") F- O ") wzzzzzaY� > O W ry ; (D F- 6. O w N N ` gNU) zzzzzU,Nx p x 3 zo jowo o » » o (,� -i 000LLWU. wu- W w F- O Q. W )--- Z N ch (D n aD W O !n O O O Z 5p_ 3 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 F- 00 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N w w w w w w w w w w w w LL O O U Cq {-- - w W - F- U W < z � C- < X = O O O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 O C ~ = O O O O O O CD O O O O ce V; CD = H 6000 00 O O O O O o O V O a0 V O W W c0 M fp :J Z n U m N c0 O M (l OO 1� M ,n Z O Q a� n s UO ww`pwww µ' ww V' w w f O Z n x ZO Q z — 0 0 0 0 c 0 0 0 0 0 0 < T LL - - H w n w O ao ry 'O N ry 0 .n O S U Z x — U — b '�` n M — of z oc O X,< a - 10 Z i < 00000000 0 00 0 o 0. 99000q99 O Z N N 00 0 0 O_ 0 0 0 00 0 O O w O O Y 0 m 0 0 0 O N O O M c0 M act O N O CQ N c0 O Cl U n vi r'f-. axe U r c'7 Y n O Oi 0 a0 ao a0 00 x ,-, Q Nwv wwwwwv ao — N F- \ b^ ww ww w n< w C - n n o0000 , (=, C, _ v o 0 0 0 0 0 0 LL) 0 O Z x — F- U N M O O n ono ry n 0 0 o C 3 o x - z Z O F = < 2 7 a v v < 0 0 0 009 0 0 00 o 0 0 0 000000000 0 n W. F- 00000000000 to Z n ,.., n : fn 0OD 00N0 ON000 n rnvoa � no, c0000 Ci O v v W) (2 V WD :1 40 ,n o n ry x U F- v~i n° 0, 4 ,r wwwwwwwf9www Q Z p X n a w _! OU 'o F- „ 0 00000000oo n ^ ,no000oO ,n000 0Z� z = F_ U coco0o ,ci ,(i00C) 0o Q 1 CU < ZZO _ Z � M0omm W) CD0 J I- ¢ o -rs � � pa Q ce r- -j a - < _ 00 0 Lno00NN .-- s Z m Z co< � OO 'T N Q ad W J ~ } } Q LL LL LL LL T' Q Q (n U Z 0 (n w J J J J (n w w J z z O o� o�S U O F=- V) 3 m v> I- c J W W a w ~F Nc�d O W e F w N z Z z O aF- F Z aww o O cd s O > > w (n c 0. J D = J Y c� a LLJa �0 0 j Q Q C) w y 3 U 0 0 U O Q ¢ CO) F C� Q W < < 0 a_ QammJcozC90 z C LL W - J U Z V d o F w � 00pa- J � :E Cl O : > (r = LL LL ¢ O J W > U Fyl0 0YQ (nC� � + < X O w w Z Q Zo0v �nio � ioaR iD z oo 0 JQ 7: viv~iU)U)iE0aaaa U . wzzzzz } r0 O tOF- - - - - - F- F- Z °� N U H F-ue '8'6 ee '8 F- F- z Q g �Nzzzzz (n (nQ O ~ U Z Z0: it Ir X of Z Z W S v w ZOO » » >OOJ W (,� � � � 7UULL LLLL LL LLUUU R a Z Z 26 a0 CA O fn O O C ~ Zco w 7 -5 f City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM March 31, 1994 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Bob Whitehead, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Award of bid for Reconstruction of North Carroll Avenue and South Kimball Avenue. GENERAL INFORMATION City Council approved the bidding of N. Carroll Avenue during their August 17, 1993 meeting and South Kimball at F.M. 1709 at their November 16, 1993 meeting. Advertisement was published on February 6 and February 13. Bids were publicly opened and read aloud on February 24, 1994 at 10:00 a.m. BID TABULATION See attached bid tabulations prepared by Cheatham and Associates. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS None FUNDING/FISCAL IMPACT Funding for the North Carroll Avenue project will be provided from the$1,500,000 Street Bond Project. Funding for the South Kimball Project is available. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council award the bid to low bidder Sunmount Corporation. Please place this item on the Council's April 5, 1994 agenda for their consideration. BW Attachments: Bid Tabulation Sheets wpfdes\memos\bids.sun JE- 1 CHEATHAM AND ASSOCIATES March 29, 1994 Mr. Bob Whitehead, P.E. Director of Public Works City of Southlake 667 N. Carroll Avenue Southlake, TX 76092 Re: Street Improvements - N. Carroll Ave. & S. Kimball at F.M. 1709 Southlake, Texas Job No. 001-213/218 Dear Bob: We have tabulated the bids for the subject property and the low bidder was Sunmount Corporation with a base bid of$180,246.30. We recommend awarding the contract to the low bidder. Sunmount has performed well for the City, and we feel that they do a good job on this project. If you have.any questions or comments, please give us a call. Respectfully, Eddie Cheatham, P.E. \cztim\sun Enclosure ENGINEERS -PLANNERS -SURVEYORS A Subsidiary Firm of Ste••``-- --" lanning and Design,Inc. 1170 Corporate Drive Wes E �_,Z 7 - Arlington,Texas 76006 817/633-1. J o 640-4329 W, O O w tO N 0 w to C. O (D O O) 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O 0 LA O O r O tD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N r- - : F- r- v vwamm ao OO LnN (O 00 to O000 h00N0 N <% M N w n w) ' m m m N to O) N O O O) O O O O W) 0 Cl W 0 n n t0 O tD tD O N M v . v M LL) N v O N O O v O O V) O N t0 LL. (vyp � N V f` O) N_ N tOw 00 _Uw00vrn N_ v Nw wN C) e- O` N ww w(D 0 M wwwww wNN w /A w N O Z n w w w w w w a- N . O ^ X n LT N N N F � r ap O O O R{' m M .n N 00 N oo *0 X � N - W N O O M N t0 r O O m M M h t>0 O O W W N O w Ld W F U W - 0 0 f� - O O '/1 M v r 0 0 00 O O N M N O01 M Q Y O LL) O X a O O - M N 6. ]� G. Li < O N O N OON Y W O) O O O LD O O O O O O C:) V O tT O O) n r C) M LD O v O CR O O 0 0 0 0 0 to to 0 0 0 F - r i h L j tl Ln CV) 0 1- ao cr o co o c4 csi tci o c� v ti c6 1n L i L(i 0 v N N N tD M O (D to LD V) O O tC) (7 O) C7 0 0 N n O O o M Z > a .6 O LT N ' N co O v) K N M v LD LD N N N tD v LD O) N O) tD O Z x -' ei O w w w w win w- ww X a U r .- O) (D A C7 M N O) N C7 M N co 0 V F N O ry w w t 0 O) w Cl) w w w N w 64 w N e� O ir'f w w N w w w N • < W 04O (�V ^ . vOW O O v M M O ' W - Pt` '0O' v vl v M to F � (-- M O N M O 00 - O t` - O� - O K < C7 W - ,-+ : W N h - 'o O W N O < N 'R h O O 00 t` - r M N h N O � SZZoo U ry o moaia < a LL < v i 00to0000 co 00000000o0ooaa000 o co M ; LDOMOLpOv t+7 00000000000000000 o M ~ OncolL : tNDIsO) " 0t0D � N0 (0D COON OLNOSnaaa0 cn M < 00 v N LD td O �! O N co LD v N LD Ln r O A S N M y O LA � ' O Ow� Of � � N a 0 w M LD N Oww 00 N M N w N w N N W 1 O ry . (� wwLD E 0 Nww wwm N w w N O Zo w w w tv w w N < .0r n y N N y X - ~' O�00 O OOO O On ON OR Ost O— OOCOMO LL) O 'O - O 'OO < � OOX W � o 'c OM .000t" N N u} dOQ a0V) zZm O OC OC G. lt] CL LL < O : O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O M ; O O t 0 0 0 C O 0 D O O O O O O O O O O O O L n 0 0 0 0 L D M CO W LO CD M CM (V 0000 CD 00000001- 0000 Cl) co Z h N N t� 0 (O M N(O Lo N O to (o O LD O LD O N O LD v LD O 0 0 m 'a OO) LDM Ol LD CO 0000 �� W) tO •-_NOOQV LO N N O_ O �_ C) coNN_ O) wOw O► Nw0 vN0Dww0 � (O a6% wN O O w w N W LD Gelw w w w w N w w Of m UO O X v H w N w N w N a- J 400. Z - lil OO y 0000000 00000 LD 000000 LD0000 5 : O X he W O O v O O N O O O 1(?191" N O O O tO N N 0 0 0 m ODOtii 5 � U NO � LDOhN O ('7 C7 LD LDOOf� � .-- ('7 (7NO 'a0 2 Co Z Z O t0 O LD 00 O O Q : Z < OX ` : Z � M � � N LD O : p a 0 ? W a-c CL w < _ co v0) vrnv O CD, (DOo0000000 C> Z co (OMCM in O � OOOONOO COt0 NLD O m ' < m 0 .- O) CO CO t0 M (D LD LD ^ a0 J J/j z } ( � A } } } } iLL. LLLj U: >:Z O n fn nJ (/ (n JJ / (J f- Z /j Z F Z 00 O = �` Z N C Q y Q Z t O > CDO W O Z O W J Z F- M m co OtS : P O O W O W O F' a c x w N F- h 0 Cl)e- O- L1 m ¢ N Z 0 W m O < W ^ W Z W J LLJ W O 0W < c F- 0 } N = a WQ W � � a Z Z 02 V > � < X Oo W ZCWn ~ z cn w O W ' G C4. O OtOLL CAW 2 LL_ � 0 JQStl � O z Z F- C� (1) p, O Z J � J H C yF- F- r O — U f X Vjm O UWUU i < : 2 0 U) W U W O O D! Q Z w ( : Lu LC CA — ¢ LA: O QQ W F- O m — W V >> � w W W a t r ¢ W Z m m (n Q � U m w y Z F- « L.ielsOCpU ¢ w W ui :3 < < (.5 Z Z pa J U J J > O Q F- Of U ¢ Z (n : tr --) --L < } W ¢ cFUW > ¢ WWOWC W W Y 0 < > Z w UW -1a W CEO Q FmU J> wO � omOwm ~~ m0o ZQJ J W 2 o � JOF- — — J F < O LL : = a — O < z ¢ Ye a� < QJ � Uxn2D ; (W a (nW ►- v � � O W~45 m C9 0 Od 0z � LLF- p vi (r = U� < U �co Qa,* U_ CL � UU P 'rz z < (nWtrF- ►- W 2p � � ¢ � � zz C) O _ O — " U� ZUDv(nQ Yo: FX0 (n0 ¢ F- O -- � 00 F- F- U_ N : LL — Z o U U < Uu� U U n. L) ;- ;- , : 7 ¢ LLro F- -N H mw D: O 1- z < Z O m F- -A °6x— ►- Y0Yc YmF- YYOwpO _ (n0F.: F- =(rw W ULL V W oo WoUUUUM = — L1J F, 0 -izM Zm F, QQ W = W = � Y200 = 2 W0 (0 o W doWW5Z W 0 �- F- - UF- UX F- F- � > W Q 2 � U tii o 7 wOOw(n00 2J0E- : � : � ¢ : W : ¢ ¢ WD: WV oC F O ? � Z ¢ UU ¢ LLO 00 < U) 6JcoO_ F- v iDF- 6tou) dmW _ LLI F, Z �.- m co ; W Z N M v to (O n v tD t0 '� GoO) O 5E_ 3 v 0000m40 Cl) C. O (D O O O O O O O O O Co O O O O O 00 O (O 0 CO ON V) CoOOOOOOOOOO O tO O Cl OO C V) MO Cl? tDO Nan NC.: N O O CO OOO CD co t» O N co tO 000 N M N 00 N (n n 0 Go tO 0 to cow (D Cl N t0 00 a a O tO V O r r (V O tO 0 N co m ; O -T O r n r V tO tO r C7 t0 N u0 (O tO 0) r m r CO N tO O Of M LL - 10 ry N : () C7 N O O) C7 CO w (O N w C) N t0 (-i w ri tO C i w N w CM N w N w w(O M w ('7 w w w w r w w Ic w w w N (O O N X (V H to N w w w w N N z F- ry (A N N O x ."1 - H U 3 °° i' y (" o noo - o 00000 �n00000 .n . C) C) X o - o v000 0000 - o - rvv1� 10, no ..) o W 1140 ,off 1- V ° o � � 000 (v oo 0ov rv � n - or rn - o vtv :, .nO m Q-, o h .n ry O 00 3 o k - : 7 a ry ry ry < 00 00 (D0000 0 ooOC) MOOOOOO000000 0o ao 0 n N O O O O O v t0 O O to O N O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n M pp N (D I- CO 0 00 N CO N to N CO 7 0 0) O O O O M O O M O 00 tO N co (n (O V N N r O) M O) tO N �f (O O 00 tD O t0 < O N O tO 0 N O q� .p (`') T (D (") O O r O eO N co v w N m m tO tO V O N tO N t0 P V _ W O ry .a V N w co M N n0 w tD tD (O (h (•7 O) w (7 (O N N w cV w tO t0 x N w(O - w w w w r w w C 7 w H w N V M X N y w N w w r w w w r N to ~ V N to tR W N to 0 0 0 h 0 0 - O O to O O tr-. .n O O - o 0 0 0 0 0 0 mx � � w .o08orvo - oov v .-) O - 0w - vrv - .cCD 0 zOQ1i1xm FU m0 (�ioe0ao - rv 'o nrv -'ooC) w 0, "t rvv f" m z a X 0, U to OP 30 - i � a � - to : 0 0 0 0 C3 N 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O W)M O O O O V: r 0 M O O O O Co O O O O O O O O O O O O O M CN : (OO ao (D (D M 0000 V* 0000a 000 to OOO Oi N 00 C- o Y M N V' (O co 0 0 tO v N O O tO 0 0 tO N n 0 tO O Of O C V �p 0 b 0 r f0 ti O) tO N N to v O V O aD tD O r O n tO ') O 7 tO t0 N z ^ O a 0`( : U t0 N tO 0) N N w (O MI M 10 C.) CO w W) N M N N N 69 co ,.) V, N N N (O W w M w w w r w w m w N w M N 69 O == N N tb O O O to O O O O O O O o 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 t>0 (� �_ w (� O - r) to O O O . 0 to h -ICD 0 I'D h O to O O W X K - F' O O w ac m (� N O O O t- - O O v) n CD O O O O - N v v - O "r O ' Q m o X F' z d .O to v - - - O to n. 0 x < 2 n ry v a a � a _ a v N00tO co a 0000000000000Oo00 0 v � oaorl� (ano .- Ooro9o000000ao0O0O to to F- tO0WW roa0 M t0 O (O O v0 voto000N_ 0tO00 M to 0 aDN tO UD UD 000 O (000 �Cql Ic'I 0 o, 0', n O M r h tO r N M Y N N Y Y O tO M M N to N t0 0 N n 1O M O ' U (NV O n N U 1n O_ NN H r- 64 0 MONN C6V O) w w t0 r N(O O w Mww NN w w N r N Z n o0 H N N N w - N N w w r N Q X v ao N to Vt i , U Y00tON O OOn tO OONN 00 (O(OOOOO D ; x C6" <_ �_ w NOnN r (oO OOOf OO (Or rN00tnt0 OOOO m < Oa WNm ; � V '? 00 r (D0nN 00 to v o (O O O N O to N N N v) r 00 O X t-- : a N N tf) F- aQ < z < � _ CO V 0) V a'm Za M O tip 00No00 0N0 ro co tnr) co 0000O 0hONOro M tn tO (O 0) C7 ooO000 m NrN W) o r z >: } (L (n Q } } 0 } } } } LL LL LA: 0 LL (n >: v7 J J (n 0 (n (nJ J W U (n F 0 E60 w J J(n J J (n J Z z r f Z 00 OX ON z ] N J r JO 0 O06 ( w 0 a F ~ z aF O Oz OW JZ F- :3 a�S a w O :3 W D �� : rn O in w Nt- N OF N o o m m z w > tr Y Q J O u ^ z w > O W O LL > } a � m � � (n ,wLt, m N i W o ° U >p (U) � � z Z � U) W < : w co - w LL o Ow _ 0, > LL m o z 1- o KOF- o oZU � C� (i� 0CL J h X m U (L U U Q 0 4 > cr W W af O Q W U m m (n O m F J ca O Y _ Cl) O : < < c1.i � LL C) W > Z ¢ < � U� UO , w V) F- m Uw > ¢ (n U (ndU � ww � W Q 1 Y ; Nap ¢ J6wzOwwOm00 ¢ w -Ja0 ZOO J Y '� O F- mU � JOF- - � .J O w � m� - J W 06 x a - O ¢ OZ ¢ Y = ►' < � Q ►- J � UQJx � F (n(n allo F- vY � O w ►- U aO m c� Q C9 Oa [7z Fx - P (n wxg (na U Em Qamo (Laa DUU FMZ Z < (nwMH - � i0 � O � Quo Zz (n0 U } ZUo (n3 rm Uo :, oQ- 0oo � O D U X H U h- H_ aLL i0 (` F Zvi ui0(~i� wUwUoaU,� � UUrz ¢ 0 (n 1- Jtd , .6 - F- YOYUOYmF- YYD W OQ Q } z (� ; _ (n0 � Z ¢ F- = 0: W wU (LU_ WU_Uo! 0000mD - W I- D - F- w WW xZ (n F W S W xgYxOOxx W � (n F = i (ii� 0- z� Uo¢ �(naogJiOdF- vUol- n (nQam �o zwoowc RQiwtniawW O LDZQUULLU W m o � crvriri" v- zm tc aW riri r� C O O O O O O O O O O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O O C 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O C : ►- O o o O O O O O O O O O O O O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O M : N w w w w N N N w w w w N N w N N N w w w N CO N w N N 4f L O O Cy WLLI u w 2 0x � � a Cl) d � < c o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cl 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 c o 0 0 0 o 0 0 o 0 0 09 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 (A0 0 C �-- 0 0 00 o 0 0 0 O O O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O y w w N w w w w w N w w w w w w w w w w w N w N w w N N O C_ W z Z 0Q aa a < c o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o o O o 0 0 o o 0 00000 0 o O o 0 c 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 o O O o 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O G C O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o C yN N N w N w w N N N N N w w w w N N w w w N w N w w N N U O W Z O x a d c¢ ¢ o f o 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 O O N C7 0 N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O zW N h F v 0 0 0 T T toN O O O O N O O O O O O O N 0 0 0 0 V h Z Q TC4 c : y wowo1� m w O O OOTO (OOOvON ('�NOYO to N � O � N O V N ONe- QO �N T Y LqOq a- f�(00 C70 t0 T O z h < O, N U wN O CNI w;w1O N wco wcnWN wNe- N wN ww wwN 'Q w j F. w N w w N w w w N w Q : < OXvo�o w � NN e O W Oo � Of`o') � � OOO11 OOOMM � O O r- r 0 O vO m ; F, 3 < (yj Cv �p F- U m 00 N tn O f< N 00 �O O M 6 A O lci f` N C-i C7 N N ci O T O cn 10 < 0 X Z � a T N N N F- Q < A 0 CL LL < IT T T v .� 00 (0000000000 � 0 . Z m Q � 0 C%j LC)a) CO •- tD O tD B O O Q n (O N a C7 U Z LLIn � Z � >: LL UQ >: )� O >: � > � LLLLLLLLLL . . . O J J (J7 0 (n fn J J W U 6F- (6 () U) (n J J U) U) J J to J F- F- CO F X Z Z Z F- Z > S Z > N Y J Q Z O a(j O LU > 00 O QZ O O W FZ m ~ O QO oiS a O w W D F- ` M Lu C x w y F- U) a L'i m a O C Y Y Q w ui C4 Z LL.l > p H _O L � u — z � a � J (n m > F' u w 0 0 Z ? (W.. > _ m � Q � w wWz Lu B : U oU) w wO z Z � (~i� wz w m W : ¢ LL W O � tOLL 0w x LL O J Q O LL � O Z O : O 0 : O j ZF- U) o m0dOZJF J Q : O LYof ¢ : W z � `� 'nwLu < W LL 000 W F- 0 � ? W w m w LLJ : F- (a. O X X w J LL --' F- m U) = z ~ m ~ F- U >> M W wwa WO Q w066CnO0 � 0Y w O ¢ ¢ aa = W3 11Jp zFJ � oU oJx �V d Q0a ( w f = > < � Z a U) ) 0- L) w o � > W° m a ow u � F m < wmo zUF- oQ m wo w o a � � o 08 ¢ O < Z QYF- a � — Of 2vU mQa0ad9ZUU u m � �ZMXmU) co > a OoUMOMa2ozzO z 0 U >O — Y � Ot OF 0 p00 F- .. Wxuwu - F UZ U O v) a U. N yNd = '_ t LL O 0YmYY w� F" JaB 0YUUwOVV( '� Z Z U) F- WF mow W ULLUw Wn w 2ZU w Z Z -i WWWF= WMF=. � UaF- 0XF- - > W0 w00 wn � 0 tn W e < < w w W : FJ-- ? LDz < 0UaLLUW. OUa (naoJcOdF- viDF- �n �n(ndmW z r m d W Zao T O .- N C') Y O t0 t� L7 O 0 �E -5 City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM CITY MANAGER 3 - March 30, 1994 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Bob Whitehead, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Letter Contract for Engineering Services with Cheatham and Associates for the Design of the Road Entry and Drainage Channel to Serve the Expansion of Bicentennial Park Attached you will find the letter contract for the services outlined above. The channel will be within a 50 foot drainage easement and adjacent to the 60 foot right-of-way intended for the street. The proposed street is 37 feet back-to-back and should be adequate for the anticipated traffic to and from the park. We are separating this contract from the park related contract to allow us flexibility in bidding and construction. If bids for this contract are appropriate, we will proceed with the construction prior to letting park contract. This should insure adequate access and drainage for the park during construction. If bids are out of line, these improvements will be re-bid as a part of the overall park improvements. The fee for services ($16,500) is based on the Texas Society of Professional Engineers (TSPE) Curve B. Funds for this contract will come from the Park Dedication Special Revenue Fund. Please place this item on the April 5, 1994 Council Agenda. BW Attachment: Letter Contract WPFILES\MEMOSTARK.CON CHEATHAM AND ASSOCIATES March 29, 1994 Mr. Bob Whitehead, P.E. Director of Public Works City of Southlake 667 N. Carroll Avenue Southlake, Texas 76092 Re: Proposal For Providing Professional Services In Connection With The Design Of Extension Of Park Access Road From F.M. 1709 To Bicentennial Park CONSULTANT'S UNDERSTANDING The City is currently acquiring additional park property in the vicinity of F.M. 1709 and Bicentennial Park. Therefore, Southlake would like to be able to construct a second point of access, from F.M. 1709, to Bicentennial Park through this property. In that regard, Southlake has directed Cheatham & Associates to prepare construction plans and associated documents, to facilitate the construction of a street and drainage construction plans, for the extension of this access road. SCOPE OF SERVICES 1. Surveying 1.1 Our firm will furnish all necessary surveying field and office work necessary to perform the engineering design and to prepare construction plans. 1.2 We wiil also furnish all construction staking. 1.3 Surveying for easement preparation will also be furnished. (See Item 3.2) 2. Engineering 2.1 Our firm will furnish all necessary technical expertise required to accomplish the engineering design of the street and drainage improvements. The design will be in accordance with applicable city and highway department regulations. 2.2 Our firm will then prepare construction plans, specifications and contract documents based on the engineering design. 2.3 We will assist in the advertising for and taking of construction bids. We will issue any required addendums. Our firm will assist in the processing of contract documents after contract award and will issue notice-to-proceed. ENGINEERS •PLANNERS• SURVEYORS A Subsidiary Firm of So---'-� —finning and Design,Inc. 1170 Corpoi ate Drive West Arlington,Texas 76CV-)6 817/633-10. J 640-4329 Mr. Bob Whitehead, P.E. March 29, 1994 City of Southlake Page 2 2.4 Periodic on-site visits by an engineer will take place during construction. We will issue and process any required change orders. 2.5 We will provide assistance in conducting the final inspection and issuance of certificate of completion. 3.0 Right-of-way (If Required) 3.1 Our firm will conduct the search for deeds and conduct other research at the Tarrant County Courthouse necessary for the preparation of the required right-of-way documents. 3.2 We will then prepare the legal (metes and bounds) descriptions of the right-of- way with computer plotting. This work element also includes the surveying work necessary to prepare right-of-way documents. 3.3 This element includes preparation of the final written documents and of the accompanying drawings. 3.4 This proposal does not contemplate our firm providing assistance in acquiring property owner's signatures, and not participating in any condemnation proceedings without additional compensation. 4.0 Inspection 4.1 We will not furnish on-site construction inspection, but will make periodic visits to the site and will be available for plan interpretation. Mr. Bob Whitehead, P.E. March 29, 1994 `�.•- City of Southlake Page 3 FEES We will provide all services and products described in the scope of services including all services necessary for engineering surveying, engineering, preparation of construction plans and specifications, preparation of construction cost estimates, contract administration, construction staking and periodic visits during construction, and as-built plans. [See Engineer's Estimate and Excerpts from the TSPE General Engineering Services Manual on the last three pages.] * Engineering Fee [Based on TSPE Curve B, 8.5% of Engineer's Estimate of Construction Cost] $14,000.00 Surveying Fees [Flat Fees based on estimate of time required times hourly rate for field party] Design Survey (No Additional Fee) Construction Staking $2,500.00 �— Right-of-way Document Preparation (If Required) [Flat Fees based on estimate of time required times hourly rates for technicians] Research (Fee to be based Documents/drawings/field work upon scope of work) * Total Professional Fees $16,500.00 * These fees to be computed for final billing based upon actual construction costs of the project. Please note that all direct expenses, such as travel and printing are included in the above fees. The fees cover only that work specified in the proposal. It does not include; - Soils testing - Other testing involving outside laboratory services - Revisions to material prepared beyond that specified in proposal The above listing of services or others not included in the basic fees may be added to our agreement at your request and approval of estimated costs or rates. FEE SCHEDULE 1/01/94 Professional fees for studies and reports are calculated using hourly rates which include all wages, benefits, overhead and profit. The fees include all incidental costs and expenses (except where specifically noted), including all travel, out-of-pocket expenses, drafting, telephone, typing, etc., plus direct expenses times a handling multiplier. The fees proposed for this project are based on the hours estimated for each phase of the project times hourly rates. The following is the current rate schedule used to calculate job fees. Principal Engineer. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $90.00 Registered Engineer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $75.00 Staff Engineer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $70.00 Land Planner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $65.00 Certified City Planner (AICP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . $67.50 Registered Landscape Architect . . . . . . . . . . . . . $65.00 Licensed Irrigator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $60.00 Technician . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $55.00 Construction Inspector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $45.00 Drafter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $45.00 Technical Typist . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $40.00 4 Man Survey Crew . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $85.00 3 Man Survey Crew . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $75.00 TERMS Invoicing will be based on percentage of completion. Billing will normally occur around the first of each month and payment expected within ten working days. GUARANTEE Cheatham & Associates guarantee to maintain the fees presented herein for 90 days from the date of this proposal unchanged. TERMS AND CONDITIONS Monthly billing will be on a basis of percentage of completion. Invoices are normally mailed by the 5th of each month and payment is expected within ten working days. 5IF- s Mr. Bob Whitehead, P.E. March 29, 1994 City of Southlake Page 5 GUARANTEE Cheatham & Associates guarantee to maintain the fees presented herein for 90 days from the date of this proposal unchanged. The above fees include all incidental costs and expenses (except where specifically noted), including all travel, out-of-pocket expenses, drafting, telephone, typing, etc. If the above meets with your approval, this proposal can also serve as our agreement, which you may indicate by signing in the space provided below. Please do not hesitate to call should you have any questions or requested modifications of the proposal. The opportunity to be of service to you and Southlake is greatly appreciated. Eddie Cheatham, P.E., Principal Gary Fickes, Mayor \soudil ak\proposal.wpd CHEATHAM &ASSOCIATES 1170 CORPORATE DRIVE WEST, #207 ARLINGTON, TEXAS 76006 8171633-1023 - METRO 817/640-4329 ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE BICENTENNIAL PARK STREET ACCESS ROAD& DRAINAGE DATE: MARCH 29, 1994 SHEET 1 OF 1 ITEM ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT PLAN UNIT TOTAL NO. QTY. PRICE COST 1. STREET EXCAV. (UNCLASSIFIED) C.Y. 1550 8.00 $12,400.00 2. CEMENT OR LIME STABIL. SUBGRADE S.Y. 4175 1.60 $6,680.00 3. CEMENT OR LIME FOR SUBGRADE STAB. TON 100 75.00 $7,500.00 4. 6"CLASS B STONE BASE S.Y. 4175 3.00 $12,525.00 5. PRIME S.Y. 4175 0.40 $1,670. 00 6. 6"THICK 3000 PSI CONCRETE PVMNT S.Y. 4175 20.00 $83,500.00 7. 6"MONOLITHIC CURB L.F. 1325 1.00 $1,325.00 8. EROSION CONTROL L.S. 1 2500.00 $2,500.00 9. CHANNEL EXCAVATION C.Y. 1250 10.00 $12,500.00 10. 10'INLETS EA. 4 2000.00 $8,000.00 11. 24"RCP CL III L.F. 200 30.00 $6,000.00 12. RELOCATE EXISTING INLET EA. 1 10000.00 $10,000.00 SUBTOTAL CONST. COST $164,600.00 CONST. CONTINGENCY $16,900.00 ENGINEERING&SURVEYING $16,500.00 TOTAL PROJECT COST $198,000.00 -TfIU-E�5--Vk Curves of Median Compensation CURVES A AND B 0 a a cn a! � w o O m c U' n U C y _ j> O Q) a o � v D U (n D N _ c� > ocu l.. V) O 3 u V) lD d f- U ` E Q) c (O O p p r C 3 c: H Q C N a) 41 4 O C 2 C O O QD 3 O O .L-. Q CO cn fla a) a) J L 41 L W W r m O yL � Q kn O > 3 W g c U � v W J 0 cv p a` U tL Q ° •D cuj = Q 00 O c9 V) tQ �. V T W W cu n a) 0-Z z E i, o o c _I_- a) - O C X V N V in •N Cn Q J E -a �� ....� c a a' O aci c E bD E� E p V •y I a) C E d f6 lvP O O C V ca 'fl a) > GJ� 0 o cv m 'o E tv OCc) C — cn >, J._ a 3 ,.,, � JQ- 22 O 0 au N H O G � O L L 7 •uf a� p !R 7'NLL N d O_U (V C 0 O a) ? 3 U j 3 v C � O cn Z cn a) •> a) c " O 0 OL h- E U N O uc O i a) O C Q) C U U ^o _ ` co c y : u C d O Y O C aA tQ Z O Q- L V p O C f1. O 0 _ W O. U a c O C > > O cv V) O �' ca •' U a) > U L U '� us c aJ c O N H c a : 3 a •_ m CO C a) — C 4! i 0 O > ca -0 cu i L ^ U 3 Q O E .-. C .. N =2 O M O cn V) O U O o rn m n 10 cn v o w 1N3j83d-3.398VHD DISyB f- 0 7—:) V, -% Curve A is intended to apply to assignments of which the following are typical examples: Water, wastewater and industrial waste treatment plants Low cost, or complicated, waterfront and marine terminal facilities Complicated dams and hydro-power installations Small bridges and bridges which are complicated by involved geo- metrics and unsymmetrical features, or which require location and/or alternate design studies Grade crossing eliminations Urban streets and freeways, including related drainage facilities Water distribution lines under 16-inch diameter Sanitary sewage collection lines under 24-inch diameter Pumping stations Air pressure tunnels Swimming pools Foundations Curve B is intended to apply to less complicated assignments of which the following are examples: Large intercepting and relief sewers Storm sewers and drains Sanitary sewage collection lines 24-inch diameter and over Water distribution lines 16-inch diameter and over Simple bridges and other structures of straightforward or conven- tional design Dams of average complexity Airport paving and grading ' Irrigation works, except pumping plants Railways Levees and flood walls, conventional Sewer and water tunnels(free air) Earthwork and dredging Highways and rural roads, except low-cost rural roads High-cost wharf facilities of conventional design Retaining walls and bulkheads, conventional Roads and streets A(_al' City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM March 31, 1994 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Bob Whitehead, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Contract for Engineering Services With Dunaway Associates for the Design of the Reconstruction of White Chapel Boulevard From Big Bear Creek to Highway 114 Attached you will find the contract for the services described above. The reconstruction will consist of pavement replacement, drainage improvements, and safety improvements for the 2.9 mile roadway. We interviewed three firms for this project and the Dove Road project. Based upon the proposals received and the interviews, we decided to split the two projects with the projects going to two consultants. We felt this allowed more flexibility to design these projects concurrently and to compare services received from both firms. The total fee for services on this project shall not exceed $76,075. This includes fees for geotechnical services, survey work and engineering. The fee was based upon actual estimates of time and effort involved to complete this project. Please place this item on the April 5, 1994 agenda for Council review and approval. 61/-� BW Attachment: Contract W PFILES\MEMMD UNN.CON s -, STATE OF TEXAS § § KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: COUNTY OF TARRANT § That the City of Southlake, a municipal corporation situated in Tarrant County, Texas, acting herein by and through Gary Fickes, its duly elected Mayor, hereinafter called "City", and Dunaway Associates, Inc., acting herein by and through James E. DeOtte, P.E., its duly authorized Vice President, hereinafter called "Engineer", hereby make and enter into the following agreement: ARTICLE I. SERVICES Section 1. For an in consideration of the covenants herein contained, Engineer hereby covenants and agrees as an independent contractor, to perform the services hereinafter described with diligence and in accordance with the highest professional standards customarily obtained for such services in the State of Texas. The services to be performed by Engineer hereunder shall include rehabilitative design of paving, drainage, street lighting, pavement marking, bridges, culverts and all other necessary design and engineering work for improvements in connection with the following projects and locations: WHITE CHAPEL ROAD FROM BIG BEAR CREEK TO STATE HIGHWAY 114 Section 2. The services to be performed by Engineer shall also include the following (also see Attachment #1): 1) When requested by the City, the Engineer shall attend preliminary conferences with authorized representatives of the City regarding the project and such other conferences as may be necessary in the opinion of the City so that the plans and specifications which are to be developed hereunder by the Engineer will result in providing facilities which are economical in design and conform to instruction from the City. 2) The Engineer shall attend such conferences with officials of other agencies as may be necessary in the opinion of the City for coordination of the proposed street and storm drain improvements with the requirements of such other agencies. It shall be the Engineer's duty hereunder to secure necessary information from such agencies. 3) The Engineer shall advise the City with regard to the necessity for subcontract work such as special surveys, tests, test borings, or other subsurface investigations in connection with design and engineering work to be performed hereunder. The Engineer shall also advise the City concerning the results of same. Such surveys, tests, and investigations shall be made only upon authorization by the City. 4) The Engineer shall furnish five (5) copies of the Phase 1 Concept Phase written report on the project in sufficient detail to indicate clearly the problems involved and the alternate solutions available to the City, to include layouts, preliminary right-of-way needs, cost estimates for each alternate proposed, and the Engineer's recommendations. - 1 - ' �J Z Ga._ — 5) During the Concept Phase the Engineer shall coordinate with all utilities as to any proposed utility lines or adjustment to existing utility lines within the project limits. The information obtained shall be addressed in the concept report (effect on method of reconstruction). The Engineer shall show the location of the proposed utility lines, existing utility lines and any adjustments and/or relocation of the existing lines within the project limits. The Engineer shall show on the preliminary and final plans the location of the proposed utility lines, existing utility lines and any adjustments and/or relocation of the existing lines. The Engineer shall also evaluate the phasing of the utility work as a factor in the actual drainage improvements, and shall submit such evaluation in writing to the Director of Transportation and Public Works as a part of the final plans of the project (Phase 3). 6) The Engineer shall provide necessary field surveys and furnish a copy of survey book notes to the City. 7) Engineer shall provide detailed design data,cross-sections,profiles,drainage calculations, estimates of cost and complete detailed plans and specifications. Design guidance shall be obtained from NCTCOG, TxDOT, and AASHTO. 8) The Engineer shall submit eighteen (18) copies of Phase 2 plans in preliminary form as may be necessary in the opinion of the City for review by the City and for submission to utility companies and other agencies for the purposes of coordinating work with existing and proposed utilities. The Phase 2 plans shall indicate location of existing/proposed utilities and storm drain lines. 9) The Engineer shall furnish six (6) copies of detailed Phase 3 Final Drawings and six (6) copies of Specifications for Construction as authorized by the City for use in obtaining bids, awarding contracts, constructing and completing the proposed improvements. The Engineer shall furnish and indicate on the plans the location of existing and proposed utilities and storm drains. 10) The Engineer shall furnish forty (40) copies of Phase 3 Final Construction Drawings and forty (40) bound copies of the Contract Documents containing the Notice to Bidders, Proposal, Labor Rates, Experience Records, General and Special Provisions, Specifications, Insurance Statement, Performance and Payment Bonds, and Contract forms. 11) The Engineer shall furnish two (2) copies of detailed cost estimates and proposals for authorized construction, which shall include summaries of bid items and quantities. 12) The Engineer shall secure the approval of the City of the final plans and specifications. Evidence of such approval shall be the signatures of authorized City officials inscribed on the plans. All Contract Documents shall comply in all respects with all applicable local, state, and federal laws and with all applicable rules and regulations promulgated by all local, state and national boards, bureaus and agencies. Approval by the City shall not constitute or be deemed to be a release of the responsibility and liability of the Engineer, its officers, agents, employees and subcontractors for the accuracy and competency of the services performed hereunder, including but not limited to designs, - 2 - 3 working drawings and specifications or other engineering documents. Such approval shall not be deemed to be an assumption of such responsibility and liability by the City for any error, omission, defect or negligence in the performance of such services, it being the intent of the parties that approval by the City signifies the City's approval of only the general design concept of the improvements to be constructed. The Engineer shall indemnify and hold harmless and defend the City, its officers, agents and/or employees from any loss, damages, liability or expense on account of damage to property and/or injuries (including death) to any person or persons, including officers, employees or agents of the Engineer, which are proximately caused by any negligent act, error, omission, defect, or deficiency in the performance of the Engineer's professional services or in the preparation of designs, working drawings, specifications or other engineering documents incorporated into any improvements constructed in accordance herewith. The Engineer shall defend at its own expense any suite or other proceedings brought against the City or its officers, agents or employees on account thereof and shall pay all expenses and satisfy all judgements which may be incurred by or rendered against the City or its officers, agents or employees in connection herewith; providing and except, however, that this indemnity provision shall not be construed as requiring the Engineer to indemnify or hold harmless the City, its officers, agents, or employees from loss,damages, liability or expense on account of defects or deficiencies in design criteria and information furnished to the Engineer by the City and which the Engineer could not discover by the exercise of reasonable diligence, or deviations by the contractor in construction from Engineer's designs, working drawings, specifications or other engineering documents, except such deviations as might occur with the approval of the Engineer or during the performance of work over which the Engineer has supervision. t` 13) The Engineer shall assist in the tabulation and review of all bids received for the construction of the improvements, and shall make recommendations to the City concerning these bids. At any time during the construction of this project, the Engineer shall advise on special aspects of the project at the request of the City. The Engineer will review and approve shop drawings as necessary. 14) The original drawings of all plans shall be drawn in ink on reproducible cloth or approved plastic film sheets, or as otherwise approved by the Transportation and Public Works Director, and shall become the property of the City. City may use such drawings in any manner it desires; provided, however that the Engineer shall not be liable for the use of such drawings for any project other than the project described herein. 15) The City shall pay for necessary soils testing and furnish a report of the test information to the Engineer for its use. 16) The Engineer shall determine the rights-of-way and easement needs necessary for the construction of the project and furnish same to the City. The Engineer shall provide the necessary land survey, Deed and Abstract Records search, rights-of-way maps, and descriptions of properties to be acquired upon authorization from the City. - 3 - ARTICLE II. COMPENSATION For all engineering services performed hereunder, including local travel, supplies and incidentals the City agrees to pay the Engineer a fee in an amount equal to 2.5 times the salary cost of its employees engaged on the project. Salary cost shall be equal to the cost of salaries of employees' time directly chargeable to the project, plus 32 percent for social security contributions, unemployment, excise and payroll taxes, unemployment compensation insurance, retirement benefits, medical and insurance benefits, sick leave, vacation, and holiday pay applicable thereto. The following hourly salary rates shall apply to this contract: Maximum Position Salary Cost Principal $47.85/Hour Project Manager $34.90/Hour Senior Engineer $27.00/Hour Senior Technician $22.25/Hour Technician $19.25/Hour Senior Draftsman $17.75/Hour Draftsman $12.00/Hour Administration/Clerical $15.00/Hour The City shall pay the Engineer for all subcontract work authorized by the City at the actual invoice cost. The City shall pay the Engineer for reproduction work at the current commercial rates. In no event shall the payment by the City for all work and services performed hereunder exceed the total sum of$76,075.00 for engineering, surveying, and geotechnical engineering as outlined in this contract. Method of Payment: Partial payment shall be made monthly upon receipt of an invoice from the Engineer outlining the amount of hours worked by each employee, the employee's name and classification, and the employee's salary rate along with itemized charges for any subcontract, reproduction and survey work performed during the period covered by said invoice. The aggregate of such monthly partial payments shall not exceed the following: Until satisfactory completion of Phase 1 hereunder, a sum not to exceed 35% of the maximum fee. Until satisfactory completion of Phase 2 hereunder, a sum not to exceed 65% of the maximum fee, less previous payments. Until satisfactory completion of Phase 3 hereunder, a sum not to exceed 80% of the maximum fee, less previous payments. - 4 - Until satisfactory completion of Phase 4 hereunder, a sum not to exceed 90% of the maximum fee, less previous payments. Balance of earnings to be due and payable upon satisfactory completion of Phase 5. ARTICLE III. PHASES AND SCHEDULES Engineering work on this project shall be completed according to the following schedule: Phase l: Concept designs, alternatives, studies and reports in sufficient detail to indicate generally the problems involved and the alternate solutions available including layouts, general right-of-way needs, cost estimates and the Engineer's recommendations shall be submitted within 30 calendar days after "Notice to Proceed" and survey notes are received from the City. Phase 2: Preliminary construction plans and detailed right-of-way requirements shall be submitted for review by the City and utility companies and other agencies within 28 calendar days after approval of this concept study and report. The project shall be divided into two sections in the event right-of-way acquisition appears to be a delay; Phase 3: Final construction plans and specifications shall be submitted for final review within 21 calendar days after receipt of City's Phase 2 review comments. Phase 4: Advertising/Bidding Phase shall take approximately 45 days. Phase 5: Construction/As Built Phase shall run for the duration of construction(estimated to be 180 days). Upon completion, the Engineer shall provide one (1) set of As- Built Drawing with .DWG files. ARTICLE IV. COORDINATION WITH OWNER The City shall make available to the Engineer for use in performing services hereunder all existing plans, maps, field notes, statistics, computations and other data in the City's possession relative to existing facilities and to the project. ARTICLE V. PROGRESS REPORT The Engineer shall submit monthly progress reports to the Director of Transportation and Public Works. If the Engineer determines in the course of making design drawings and specifications that the cost estimate of$780,000.00 will be exceeded, whether by change in the scope of the project, increased costs or other conditions, the Engineer shall immediately report such fact to the City's Transportation and Public Works Director and, if so instructed by the Transportation and Public Works Director, shall suspend all work hereunder. - 5 - ARTICLE VI. TRANSFER OF CONTRACT The Engineer shall not assign, sublet or transfer, in whole or in part, its interest in this agreement with the prior written consent of the City. ARTICLE VII. TERMINATION OF CONTRACT Section 1. The city may terminate this contract at any time and for any cause by a notice in writing to the Engineer. Upon receipt of such notice the Engineer shall immediately discontinue all services and work and the placing of all orders or the entering into contracts for supplies, assistance, facilities, and materials, in connection with the performance of this contract and shall proceed to cancel promptly all existing contracts insofar as they are chargeable to this contract. Section 2. If'the City terminates this contract under the foregoing Section I., the City shall pay the Engineer a reasonable amount for services performed prior to such termination, which payment shall be based upon the payroll cost of employees engaged on the work by the Engineer up to the date of termination of the contact and for subcontract, reproduction, and survey work in accordance with the method of compensation stated in ARTICLE II. hereof. Section 3. All completed or partially completed reports prepared under this contract, including the original drawings, shall become the property of the City when the contract is terminated, and may be used by City in any manner it desires; provided, however, that the Engineer shall not be liable for the use of such drawings for any project other than the project described in this contract. ARTICLE VIII. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR Engineer covenants and agrees that it will perform the work hereunder as an independent contractors, and not as an officer, agent, servant, or employee of the City; that the Engineer shall have exclusive control of and the exclusive right to control the details of the work performed hereunder, and all persons performing same, and shall be liable for the acts and omissions of its officers, agents, employees, contractors, subcontractors, and consultants; that the doctrine of respondeat superior shall not apply as between the City and the Engineer, its officers, agents, employees, contractors, subcontractors, and consultants, and nothing herein shall be construed as creating a partnership or joint enterprise between City and Engineer. ARTICLE IX. DISCLOSURE By signature of this contract, the Engineer warrants to the City of Fort worth that he has made full disclosure in writing of any existing conflicts of interest or potential conflicts of interest, including personal financial interests, direct or indirect, in property abutting the proposed project and business relationships with abutting property owners. The Engineer further warrants that he will make disclosure in writing of any conflicts of interest which develop subsequent to the signing of this contract and prior to final payment under the contract. - 6 - ARTICLE X. INSURANCE The Engineer shall not commence work under this contract until it has obtained Professional Liability Insurance as required hereunder and such insurance coverage has been approved by the City. Such insurance shall be in the minimum amount of$250,000.00 and shall include coverage of Contractually Assumed Liability. The insurance coverage prescribed herein shall be maintained throughout the period which Engineer furnishes its services hereunder and shall not be canceled, modified or altered in any manner without prior written notice to the City. In this connection, upon the signing and return of this contract by the Engineer, a Certificate of Insurance shall be furnished to the City as evidence that the insurance coverage required herein has been obtained by Engineer, and such certificate shall_contain the provision that such insurance shall not be canceled, modified or altered with thirty(30)days prior written notice to the City. ARTICLE XI. MBEMBE GOALS The Engineer acknowledges his commitment to meet the City's goals for minority-owned and women- owned business enterprise(MBEIWBE)participation in City contracts, as specified in his proposal. The Engineer agrees to furnish documentation of MBE and WBE participation such as canceled checks, etc. or such evidence as may be deemed property by the City. ARTICLE XII. RIGHT TO AUDIT (a) The Engineer agrees that the City shall, until the expiration of three (3) years after final payment under this contract, have access to and the right to examine any directly pertinent books, documents, papers and records of the Engineer involving transactions relating to this contract. The Engineer agrees that the City shall have access during normal working hours to all necessary Engineer facilities and shall be provided adequate and appropriate work space in order to conduct audits in compliance with the provisions of this section. The City shall give the Engineer reasonable advance notice of intended audits. (b) The Engineer further agrees to include in ail its subcontracts hereunder a provision to the effect that the subcontracting consultant agrees that the City shall, until the expiration of three (3) years after final payment under the subcontract, have access to and the right to examine any directly pertinent books, documents, papers and records of such consultant, involving transactions to the subcontract, and, further, that City shall have access during normal working hours to all consultant facilities, and shall be provided adequate and appropriate work space, in order to conduct audits in compliance with the provisions of this article. The City shall give the consultant reasonable advance notice of intended audits. ARTICLE XIII. VENUE Venue of any suit or cause of action under this contract shall lie in Tarrant County, Texas. - 7 - IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereby have executed this agreement in triplicate originals on this date, the day of 19_. CITY OF SOUTHLAKE DUNAWAY ASSOCIATES, INC. (ENGINEER) By: By: &/Y� 1 , Gary Fickes, Mayor <Vi es E. D e, P ., R.P.L.S., a President Address: 1501 Merrimac Circle, Suite 100 Fort Worth, Texas 76107-6572 ATTEST: ATTEST: City Secretary Secretary Summary Sub-Total I Concept $17,930 II Preliminary Design 21,655 III Final Design 12,300 IV Advertise 1,830- V Construction 3,460 Sub-Total Engineering $57,175 Geotechnical $ 3,900 Surveying (see sub-total I) $15,000 TOTAL $76,075 a Qoo p a " cm tt7 'rlvnmOm ;-, 5. �• �• 2� � y, o- N• �• g � w � • n g d o $ o 2 s o H n o ^ oO m � � �• o � '' fi $ � T A y a ° za ° H a � na n a o• < � m = y fy o 0 ro 0 N N O N O p C eo a n xxx x x x A Oo U C a a x ° a o � a F^ny J � C U S E o ti �e xx � a N N W O b d ao 0 -� cn z D � r r x1 C y ry a 9 c F. P. m n v m m m ° F. a c an d a' m ,Yl cn c m O O w w w w m O y °' C W : m o o C H 5 tRnm y � tpm Co�. q O� R o' v �C,� cr.S D C•o 0 5 w. C ❑ ry ❑ o C. re ry w fps '-rt w ❑ w D^ S _ ❑ � � � D � a ❑ 0 5 � 7' m o H ° o 00 s m C o' d ❑ y m _ E D � R Q O ` O � C x z N A N A p u. O. PJ pt» [r7 A o0 0. ao 0o Oo A A A 0, O ❑ ao bf yC � O M A O O x r'r fn J (j E `t w � x W � x x H v oa N O cn a r W D m p to A w N ._ ro a to A W IJ ro y r V -• m W N .- C y .roy J T In A w N ,ly a r� IILTT'71 D o m M o ° x pa o M v' nD ^< � nn an mm zroCp 71 (� O r .e 0• C r [j "'� b �7 nl p❑oy �. O ry� O . a o q Q7 K O C 0 a .o `� N C) P+ � �' C m G� 13 `° �t' C7 In y �i 9 o b Z ^-� H e I Z row° o. Z y Z o ° 0 0 D w F, o D •,a W ro (� y c 0 V�, 6 x x o S $ a o 1 a° a < < o' > m v g 5 p,a , m p n .� ca 0 Y 77 R; 0 tt- lm] 2 p IJ 5• p tri z A a 0' YIn C w 0 ? 5 w ? a ro D y 0 c a c 0' a G. C t C (� y pyO G G � N 0\" ^ •'� .ryT. y Ix .YT. x ��....� Oo O O O oo A 00 y Do y N O a 0a to to z ox x O H • H O N o p 8 N Oda A A x H n "d w ov w 25 25 o O cn --1 D r O ^n m O n to y •n G) ;n m p Z D < m O m O a O En > o o a m a nU z Cn: tz n a O p m v^g a° O h R.o ? Z n C A C ga In O M C O a ry o n � r F °a F ` n N� m o m C C D m z R C toR' o () (A9 -"i �. z z p i z _ o m -i o rn r" M C r n O -1 0 O T �i C_ W � T N U A A u'y U y A A T A O O w A Oo Oo Do O � s+ vi � G 0 g n cn 2 E _ o � p0 pp N w X O O 4 a x w 10 x � ^o Oro R H 69 Q D r ' C = z E E a H a z zo rz v F n o c g 0 v 0 C C7 8 a n 0 � Oa 7 Oa fin, � b xxxxxxx Ox x x x x w. in U y x � 0 0 2. � n U � xE � n S c = 0 0m -oq �� < > Jam- S d n A N U (7 O Oo 0o A a a a 8a a a a w b° O O InI_n `.] OJ 0 8 J �pA� W W U W U U O O S U O T City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM TOM NG�cR March 31, 1994 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Bob Whitehead, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Contract for Engineering Services With Rady and Associates for the Design of the Reconstruction of Dove Road From White Chapel to Kimball Road Attached you will find the contract for the services described above. The reconstruction will consist of pavement replacement, drainage improvements, and safety improvements for the 2.8 mile roadway. We interviewed three firms for this project and the White Chapel Boulevard project. Based upon the proposals received and the interviews, we decided to split the two projects with the projects going to two consultants. We felt this allowed more flexibility to design these projects concurrently and to compare services received from both firms. The total fee for services on this project shall not exceed $90,965. This includes fees for geotechnical services, survey work and engineering. The consultant shall produce a study and concept report early in the design process to determine if the construction should be let in one or two contracts. The above mentioned fee is based upon two construction contracts. The determination of the number of construction contracts shall be based upon the impact that this project has on the Middle School and the ability to perform that portion of the project during school closure. The fee was based upon estimates of time and effort involved to complete the project. Please place this items on the April 5, 1994 agenda for Council review and approval. a4VALi BW Attachment: Contract WPFILES\MEMOS\RADY.CON STANDARD PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN OWNER AND ENGINEER THIS IS AN AGREEMENT made as of , 19 , between the CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS ("OWNER"), and RADY AND ASSOCIATES, INC. ("ENGINEER"). Upon authorization from the OWNER, or its designated representative, the ENGINEER agrees to provide to the OWNER consulting engineer services and engineering design services on a fee basis as provided herein. OWNER and ENGINEER, in consideration of their mutual covenants herein, agree that the performance of professional engineering services by ENGINEER and the payment for those services by OWNER shall be as set forth below. SECTION 1 - FEE ENGINEERING SERVICES 1.1. General. 1.1.1. ENGINEER shall provide for OWNER, engineering services for the Project on a lump sum basis, pursuant to the terms and conditions of this section and in accordance with Exhibits B and C attached hereto. 1.2. Payment for Fee Engineering Services. 1.2.1. OWNER shall pay ENGINEER for Fee Engineering Services performed on a lump sum basis, according to the lump sum amount negotiated between OWNER and ENGINEER at the initiation of the Project, and as described in Exhibit C of this agreement. 1.2.2. For Additional Services OWNER shall pay ENGINEER for Additional Services as specified in Section 3, and outside the scope of Fee Engineering Services specified in Section 2, as follows: 1.2.2.1. Services. For Additional Services of ENGINEER's principals and employees engaged directly on the Project and rendered pursuant to Paragraphs 3.1. or 3.2., on the basis of ENGINEER's hourly rates as defined in Paragraph (taw PAGE - 1 SX - z 1.2.2.3. and shown on Exhibit A attached hereto, and subsequently modified in accordance with notice provisions of Paragraph 1.2.2.4. 1.2.2.2. Professional Associates and Consultants. For services and expenses of independent professional associates and consultants employed by ENGINEER to render Additional Services pursuant to Paragraph 3.1. or Paragraph 3.2., the amount billed to ENGINEER times a factor of 1.15. 1.2.2.3. Payment. Owner shall pay ENGINEER for Additional Services according to the hourly rates for the ENGINEER's personnel engaged directly in performing such services, as shown on Exhibit A, "Hourly Rates for Additional Services" attached hereto and incorporated herein. 1.2.2.4. Adjustments to Rates. Upon thirty (30) days written notice to OWNER, but not more than one time per annum, ENGINEER may increase or decrease hourly rates as the ENGINEER deems necessary to maintain personnel salaries at competitive levels and to adequately compensate ENGINEER for overhead expenses. The increased or decreased rate shall not be effective until after expiration of such thirty (30) day notice period. 1.2.2.5. Direct Expenses. In addition to payments for Additional Services provided in Paragraph 1.2.2.3., OWNER shall pay ENGINEER for actual expenses times a factor of 1.15 for all costs incurred in connection with the performance of Additional Services. Expenses shall mean the actual costs incurred by ENGINEER, or ENGINEER'S independent professional associates or consultants, directly or indirectly in connection with the Project, such as expenses for: transportation and subsistence incidental thereto; obtaining bids or proposals from Contractor(s); toll telephone calls and telegrams; express mailing costs; reproduction of reports, Drawings, Specifications, Bidding Documents, and similar Project-related items. 1.3. Times of Payments for Fee Engineering Services. 1.3.1. ENGINEER shall submit monthly statements for Fee Engineering Services and for Additional Services and Expenses. The statements will be based upon ENGINEER's estimate of the proportion of the total services for the Project actually completed at the time of billing. OWNER shall make prompt monthly payments in response to ENGINEER's monthly statements. 1.3.2. Upon conclusion of each phase of Fee Engineering Services, OWNER shall pay such additional amount, if any, as may be necessary to bring total compensation paid on account of such phase to the total indicated in Exhibit C attached hereto. PAGE - 2 S)(- 3 1.3.3. If OWNER fails to make any payment due ENGINEER for services and expenses within sixty (60) days after receipt of ENGINEER's statement therefor, the amounts due ENGINEER will be increased at the rate of one percent (1%) per month from said sixtieth (60th) day, and in addition, ENGINEER may, after giving seven ( ) days written notice to OWNER, suspend services under this Agreement until ENGINEER has been paid in full amounts due for services, expenses and charges. 1.3.4. In the event of termination of ENGINEER upon the completion of any phase of the Fee Engineering Services, progress payments due ENGINEER for services rendered through such phase shall be determined in accordance with the total- compensation specified in Exhibit C. In the event of such termination of ENGINEER during any uncompleted phase, the ENGINEER shall be paid for services rendered up until termination in accordance with the payment for Additional Services and Expenses in Section 1.2., provided such amount does not exceed the total amount indicated on Exhibit C. In the event of any such termination, ENGINEER also will be reimbursed for the charges of independent professional associates and consultants employed by ENGINEER to render Fee Engineering Services, and paid for all unpaid Additional Services and Expenses, plus all termination expenses. Termination expenses mean additional expenses directly attributable to termination, which, if termination is not due to ENGINEER's breach of this Agreement, shall include contract damages provided by law. 1.4. Performance and Acceptance of Fee Engineering Services. 1.4.1. The provisions of this section and the various rates of compensation for ENGINEER's services provided for in this Agreement have been agreed to in anticipation of the orderly and continuous progress of the Project through completion of the Construction Phase. ENGINEER's obligation to render services hereunder will extend for a period which may reasonably be required for the design, award of contracts, construction and initial operation of the Project including extra work and required extensions thereto. 1.4.2. ENGINEER's services under each phase identified in Exhibit B shall each be considered complete at the earlier of: (1) the date when the submissions for that phase have been accepted by OWNER; or (2) thirty (30) days after the date when such submissions are delivered to OWNER for final acceptance, plus such additional time as may be considered reasonably necessary for obtaining approval of governmental authorities (other than the OWNER), if any, having jurisdiction to approve the design of the Project. 1.4.3. After acceptance by OWNER of the ENGINEER's Drawings, Specifications and other Final Design Phase documentation, ENGINEER shall proceed with performance of the services called for in the Bidding or Negotiating Phase. This Phase shall terminate and the services to be rendered thereunder shall be considered complete upon PAGE - 3 Sh - /, commencement of the Construction Phase or upon cessation of negotiations with prospective Contractor(s). 1.4.4. The Construction Phase will commence with the execution of the first prime contract to be executed for the work of the Project or any part thereof, and will terminate upon written recommendation by ENGINEER of final payment on the last prime contract to be completed. Construction Phase services may be rendered at different times in respect to separate prime contracts if the Project involves more than one prime contract. 1.4.5. If OWNER has requested significant modifications or changes in the general scope, extent or character of the Project, the time of performance and the fee for ENGINEER's services shall be equitably adjusted. 1.4.6. If the Construction Phase has not commenced within ninety (90) calendar days after completion of the Final Design Phase, ENGINEER may, after giving seven(7) days written notice to OWNER, suspend services under this Agreement. 1.4.7. If ENGINEER's services for design or during construction of the Project are delayed or suspended in whole or in part by OWNER for more than three (3) months for reasons beyond ENGINEER's control, ENGINEER shall on written demand to OWNER (but without termination of this Agreement), be paid as provided in Paragraph 1.3.4. If such delay or suspension extends for more than one (1) year for reasons beyond ENGINEER's control, or if ENGINEER for any reason is required to render Construction Phase services in respect of any prime contract for construction, materials or equipment more than one year after Substantial Completion is achieved under that contract, compensation to Engineer provided for in this Agreement shall be subject to equitable adjustment. 1.4.8. In the event that the work designed or specified by ENGINEER is to be furnished or performed under more than one prime contract, or if ENGINEER's services are to be separately sequenced with the work of one or more prime contractors (such as in the case of fast-tracking), OWNER and ENGINEER shall, prior to commencement of the Final Design Phase, develop a schedule for performance of ENGINEER's services during the Final Design, Bidding and Negotiating and Construction Phases in order to sequence and coordinate properly such services as are applicable to the work under such separate contracts. This schedule is to be prepared whether or not the work under such contracts is to proceed concurrently. PAGE - 4 JX- .5 SECTION 2 - SCOPE OF ENGINEERING SERVICES 2.1. General. 2.1.1. ENGINEER shall provide for OWNER professional engineering services in all phases of a Project to which this Agreement applies as hereinafter provided. These services will include serving as OWNER's professional engineering representative for the Project, providing engineering consultation and advice and furnishing customary civil, structural, mechanical and electrical engineering services and customary architectural services incidental thereto. 2.1.2. For Fee Engineering Services, the Engineer will provide all services specified in Exhibit B, except as otherwise identified herein. 2.2. Construction Phase. 2.2.1. General Administration of Construction Contract. ENGINEER shall consult with and advise OWNER and act as OWNER's representative as provided in Part I General Provisions of the "Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction North Central Texas of the North Central Texas Council of Governments." The extent and limitations of the duties, responsibilities and authority of ENGINEER as assigned in said Standard General Conditions shall not be extended, except as ENGINEER may otherwise agree in writing. All of OWNER's instructions to Contractor(s) will be issued through ENGINEER who will have authority to act on behalf of OWNER to the extent provided in said Standard General Conditions except as otherwise agreed to in writing by ENGINEER and OWNER. 2.2.2. Visits to Site and Observation of Construction. In connection with observations of the work of Contractor(s) while it is in progress: 2.2.2.1. ENGINEER shall make visits to the site at intervals appropriate to the various stages of construction as ENGINEER deems necessary in order to observe as an experienced and qualified design professional the progress and quality of the various aspects of Contractor(s)' work. Based on information obtained during such visits and on such observations, ENGINEER shall endeavor to determine in general if such work is proceeding in accordance with the Contract Documents and ENGINEER shall keep OWNER informed of the progress of the work. 2.2.2.2. The purpose of ENGINEER's visits to the site will be to enable ENGINEER to better carry out the duties and responsibilities assigned to and undertaken by ENGINEER during the Construction Phase, and, in addition, by exercise of ENGINEER's efforts as an experienced and qualified design professional, to provide the OWNER a greater degree of confidence that the completed work of Contractor(s) will conform generally to the Contract PAGE - 5 Sx- 4 Documents and that the integrity of the design concept as reflected in the Contract Documents has been implemented and preserved by Contractor(s). ENGINEER shall not, during such visits or as a result of such observations of Contractor(s)' work in progress, supervise, direct or have control over Contractor(s)' work nor shall ENGINEER have authority over or responsibility for the means, methods, techniques, sequences or procedures of construction selected by Contractor(s), for safety precautions and programs incident to the work of Contractor(s) or for any failure of Contractor(s) to comply with laws, rules, regulations, ordinances, codes or orders applicable to Contractor(s) furnishing and performing their work. Accordingly, ENGINEER can neither guarantee the performance of the construction contracts by Contractor(s) nor assume responsibility for Contractor(s)' failure to furnish and perform their work in accordance with the Contract Documents. 2.2.3. Defective Work. During such visits and on the basis of such observations, ENGINEER may disapprove or reject Contractor(s)' work while it is in progress if ENGINEER believes that such work will not produce a completed Project that conforms generally to the Contract Documents or that it will prejudice the integrity of the design concept of the Project as reflected in the Contract Documents. 2.2.4. Interpretations and Clarifications. ENGINEER shall issue necessary interpretations and clarifications of the Contract Documents and in connection therewith prepare work directive changes and change orders as required. 2.2.5. Shop Drawings. ENGINEER shall review and approve(or take other appropriate action in respect of), Shop Drawings (as that term is defined in the aforesaid Standard General Conditions), samples and other data which Contractor(s) are required to submit, but only for conformance with the design concept of the Project. Such reviews and approvals or other action shall not extend to means, methods, techniques, sequences or procedures of construction or to safety precautions and programs incident thereto. 2.2.6. Substitutes. ENGINEER shall evaluate and determine the acceptability of substitute materials and equipment proposed by Contractor(s), but subject to the provision of Paragraph 3.2.3. 2.2.7. Inspections and Tests. ENGINEER shall have authority, as OWNER'S representative, to require special inspection or testing of the work, and shall receive and review all certificates of inspections, testings 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). PAGE - 6 S �f- 7 2.2.8. Disputes between OWNER and Contractor. ENGINEER shall act as initial interpreter of the requirements of the Contract Documents and judge of the acceptability of the work thereunder and make decisions on all claims of OWNER and Contractor(s) relating to the acceptability of the work or the interpretation of the requirements of the Contract Documents pertaining to the execution and progress of the work. BECAUSE THE ENGINEER IS UNWILLING TO INCUR THE POTENTIAL LIABILITY ARISING OUT OF THE ENGINEER'S INTERPRETATION WHICH WILL HAVE ADVERSE CONSEQUENCES TO EITHER THE OWNER OR THE CONTRACTOR UNLESS THE OWNER INDEMNIFIES THE ENGINEER, OWNER AGREES TO DEFEND, SAVE, AND HOLD ENGINEER HARMLESS FROM ANY DAMAGES ARISING FROM OR RELATED TO ANY SUCH INTERPRETATIONS OR DECISIONS RENDERED IN GOOD FAITH. 2.2.9. Applications for Payment. Based on ENGINEER's on-site observations, and on review of applications for payment and the accompanying data and schedules: 2.2.9.1. ENGINEER shall recommend in writing, payments to Contractor(s). In the case of unit price work, ENGINEER's recommendations of payment will include determinations of quantities and classifications of such work (subject to any subsequent adjustments allowed by the Contract Documents). 2.2.9.2. By recommending any payment ENGINEER will not thereby be deemed to have represented that exhaustive, continuous or detailed reviews or examinations have been made by ENGINEER to check the quality or quantity of Contractor(s)' work as it is furnished and performed, beyond the responsibilities specifically assigned to ENGINEER in this Agreement. ENGINEER's review of Contractor(s)' work for the purposes of recommending payments will not impose on ENGINEER responsibility to supervise, direct or control such work or for the means, methods, techniques, sequences, or procedures of construction or safety precautions or programs incident thereto or Contractor(s) compliance with laws, rules, regulations, ordinances, codes or orders applicable to their furnishing and performing the work. It will also not impose responsibility on ENGINEER to make any examination to ascertain how or for what purposes any Contractor has used the moneys paid on account of the Contract Price, or to determine that title to any of the work, materials or equipment has passed to OWNER free and clear of any lien, claims, security interest or encumbrances, or that there may not be other matters at issue between OWNER and CONTRACTOR that might affect the amount that should be paid. 2.2.10. Contractor(s)' Completion Documents. ENGINEER shall receive maintenance and operating instructions, schedules, guarantees, bonds and certificates of inspection, tests and approvals which are assembled by Contractor(s) in accordance with the Contract Documents and shall transmit them to OWNER. PAGE - 7 5W- F 2.2.11. Inspections. ENGINEER shall conduct an inspection to determine if the work is substantially complete and a final inspection to determine if the completed work is acceptable so that ENGINEER may recommend, in writing, final payment to Contractor(s), and may give written notice to OWNER and the Contractor(s) that the work is acceptable (subject to any conditions therein expressed), but any such recommendation and notice will be subject to the limitations expressed in Paragraph 2.2.9.2. 2.2.12. Limitation of Responsibilities. ENGINEER shall not be responsible for the acts or omissions of any Contractor, or of any subcontractor or supplier, or any of the Contractor(s)' or subcontractor's or supplier's agents or employees or any other persons (except ENGINEER's own employees and agents), at the site or otherwise furnishing or performing any of the Contractor(s)' work. SECTION 3 - ADDITIONAL SERVICES OF ENGINEER 3.1. Services Requiring Authorization in Advance. If authorized in writing by OWNER, ENGINEER shall furnish or obtain from others Additional Services of the types listed in Paragraphs 3.1.1. through 3.1.13., inclusive. These services are not included as part of Fee Engineering Services and these will be paid for by OWNER as indicated in Paragraph 1.2.2. 3.1.1. Preparation of applications and supporting documents (in addition to those furnished under Fee Engineering Services), for private or governmental grants, loans or advances in connection with the Project; preparation or review of environmental assessments and impact statements; review and evaluation of the effect on the design requirements of the Project of any such statements and documents prepared by others; and assistance in obtaining approvals of authorities having jurisdiction over the anticipated environmental impact of the Project. 3.1.2. Services to make measured drawings of or to investigate existing conditions or facilities, or other information furnished by OWNER except as identified in Exhibit B as part of the Basic Services of this contract. 3.1.3. Services resulting from significant changes in the general scope, extent or character of the Project or its design including, but not limited to, changes in size, complexity, OWNER's schedule, character of construction or method of financing; and revising previously accepted studies, reports, design documents or Contract Documents when such revisions are required by changes in laws, rules, regulations, ordinances, codes or orders enacted subsequent to the preparation of such studies, reports or documents, or are due to any other causes beyond ENGINEER's control. PAGE - 8 5 4,- 9 r ` 3.1.4. Providing renderings or models for OWNER's use. 3.1.5. Preparing documents for alternate bids requested by OWNER for Contractor(s)' work which is not executed or documents for out-of-sequence work. 3.1.6. Investigations and studies involving, but not limited to, detailed consideration of operations, maintenance and overhead expenses; providing value engineering during the course of design; the preparation of feasibility studies, cash flow and economic evaluations, rate schedules and appraisals; assistance in obtaining financing for the Project; evaluating processes available for licensing and assisting OWNER in obtaining process licensing; detailed quantity surveys of material, equipment and labor; and audits or inventories required in connection with construction performed by OWNER. 3.1.7. Furnishing services of independent professional associates and consultants for other than Fee Engineering Services as identified in Exhibit B (other services outside the scope of Fee Engineering Services include, but are not limited to, value engineering services, detailed operation and maintenance analyses, and other such services); and providing data or services of the types described in Section 4.4 when OWNER employs ENGINEER to provide such data or services in lieu of furnishing the same in accordance with Section 4.4. 3.1.8. Services resulting from the award of more separate prime contracts for construction, materials or equipment for the Project than are contemplated at the commencement of the project. If ENGINEER has been required to prepare Contract Documents on the assumption that more than one prime contract will be awarded for construction, materials and equipment, but only one prime contract is awarded for construction, materials and equipment for the Project, services attributable to the preparation of contract documentation that was rendered unusable and any revisions or additions to contract documentation used that was necessitated by the award of only one prime contract. 3.1.9. Services during the out-of-town travel required of ENGINEER other than visits to the site or OWNER's office as required by Section 2. 3.1.10. Assistance in connection with bid protests, rebidding or renegotiating contracts for construction, materials, equipment or services. 3.1.11. Preparation of operating, maintenance and staffing manuals to supplement Fee Engineering Services. 3.1.12. Preparing to serve or serving as a consultant or witness for OWNER in any litigation or other legal or administrative proceeding involving the Project (except for assistance in consultations which is included as part of Fee Engineering Services identified in Exhibit B). (awe PAGE - 9 SX-/d 3.1.13. Additional services in connection with the Project, including services which are to be furnished by OWNER in accordance with Section 4, and services not otherwise provided for in this Agreement. 3.2. Required Additional Services. When required by the requirements of the Project, or in circumstances beyond ENGINEER's control, ENGINEER shall furnish or obtain from others, as circumstances require, 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 Fee Engineering Services. ENGINEER shall advise OWNER promptly after starting any such Additional Services which will be paid for by OWNER as indicated in Paragraph 1.2.2. 3.2.1. All coordination, review and consulting with other independent professional associates and consultants providing services to the OWNER outside the scope of Fee Engineering Services as more particularly specified in Paragraphs 3.1.6. and 3.1.7. 3.2.2. Services in connection with work directive changes and change orders to reflect changes requested by OWNER. 3.2.3. Services in making revisions to Drawings and Specifications occasioned by the acceptance of substitutions proposed by Contractor(s). 3.2.4. Services resulting from significant delays, changes or price increases occurring as a direct or indirect result of material, equipment or energy shortages. 3.2.5. Additional or extended services during construction made necessary by: (1) work damaged by fire or other cause during construction; (2) acceleration of the progress schedule involving services beyond normal working hours; and (3) default by any Contractor. 3.2.6. Services in connection with any partial utilization of any part of the Project by OWNER prior to Substantial Completion. SECTION 4 - OWNER'S RESPONSIBILITIES OWNER shall do the following in a timely manner so as not to delay the services of ENGINEER: 4.1. Designate a person to act as OWNER's representative with respect to the services to be rendered under this Agreement. Such person shall have complete authority to PAGE - 10 5-/ - // transmit instructions, receive information, interpret and define OWNER's policies and decisions with respect to ENGINEER's services for the Project. 4.2. Provide all criteria and full information as to OWNER's requirements for the Project, including design objectives and constraints, space, capacity and performance requirements, flexibility and expandability, and any budgetary limitations; and furnish copies of all design and construction standards which OWNER will require to be included in the Drawings and Specifications. 4.3. Assist ENGINEER by placing at ENGINEER's disposal all available information pertinent to the Project including previous reports and any other data relative to design or construction of the Project. 4.4. Furnish to ENGINEER, as required for performance of Fee Engineering Services, the following: 4.4.1. data prepared by or services of others, including without limitations borings, probings and subsurface explorations, hydrographic surveys, laboratory tests and inspections of samples, materials and equipment; 4.4.2. appropriate professional interpretations of all of the foregoing; 4.4.3. environmental assessment and impact statements; 4.4.4. property, boundary, easement, right-of-way, topographic and utility surveys; 4.4.5. property descriptions; 4.4.6. zoning, deed and other land use restrictions; and 4.4.7. other special data or consultations not covered in Section 3; all of which ENGINEER may use and rely upon in performing services under this Agreement. 4.5. Arrange for access to and make all provisions for ENGINEER to enter upon public and private property as required for ENGINEER to perform services under this Agreement. 4.6. Examine all studies, reports, sketches, Drawings, Specifications, proposals and other documents presented by ENGINEER, obtain advice of an attorney, insurance counselor and other consultants as OWNER deems appropriate for such examination and render in writing decisions pertaining thereto within a reasonable time so as not to delay the services of ENGINEER. PAGE - 11 `5" ,-/z 4.7. Furnish approvals and permits from all governmental authorities having jurisdiction over the Project and such approvals and consents from others as may be necessary for completion of the Project, except as identified in Exhibit B. 4.8. Provide such accounting, independent cost estimating and insurance counselling services as may be required for the Project, such legal services as OWNER may require or ENGINEER may reasonably request with regard to legal issues pertaining to the Project including any that may be raised by Contractor(s), such auditing service as OWNER may require to ascertain how or for what purpose any Contractor has used the moneys paid under the construction contract, and such inspection services as OWNER may require to ascertain that Contractor(s) are complying with any law, rule, regulation, ordinance, code or order applicable to their furnishing and performing the work. 4.9. If OWNER designates a person to represent OWNER at the site who is not ENGINEER or ENGINEER's agent or employee, the duties, responsibilities and limitations of authority of such other person and the affect thereof on the duties and responsibilities of ENGINEER will be set forth in an exhibit that is to be identified, attached to and made a part of this Agreement before such services begin. 4.10. If more than one prime contract is to be awarded for construction, materials, equipment and services for the entire Project, designate a person or organization to have authority and responsibility for coordinating the activities among the various prime contractors. 4.11. Furnish the ENGINEER data or estimated figures as to OWNER's anticipated costs for services to be provided by others for OWNER (such as services pursuant to Paragraphs 4.6. and 4.8.), so that ENGINEER may make the necessary findings to support opinions of probable Total Project Costs. 4.12. Attend the pre-bid conference, bid opening, pre-construction conferences, construction progress and other job related meetings and substantial completion inspections and final payment inspections. 4.13. Give prompt written notice to ENGINEER whenever OWNER observes or otherwise becomes aware of any development that affects the scope or timing of ENGINEER's services, or any defect or non-conformance in the work of any Contractor. 4.14. Furnish, or direct ENGINEER to provide, Additional Services as stipulated in Paragraph 3.1. of this Agreement or other services as required. 4.15. Bear all costs incident to compliance with the requirements of this Section 4. PAGE - 12 5x-,13 SECTION 5 - OPINIONS OF COST Opinions of Cost. Since ENGINEER has no control over the cost of labor, materials, equipment or services furnished by others, or over the Contractor(s)' methods of determining prices, or over competitive bidding or market conditions, ENGINEER's opinions of probable Total Project Costs and Construction Cost provided for herein represent ENGINEER's best judgment as an experienced and qualified professional engineer, but ENGINEER cannot and does not guarantee that proposals, bids or actual Total Project or Construction Costs will not vary from opinions of probable cost prepared by ENGINEER. If prior to the Bidding or Negotiating Phase OWNER wishes greater assurance as to Total Project or Construction Costs, OWNER shall employ an independent cost estimator as provided in Paragraph 4.8. SECTION 6 - GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS 6.1. Termination. The obligations under this Agreement may be terminated by either party upon seven (7) days written notice. 6.2. Reuse of Documents. All documents including Drawings and Specifications prepared or furnished by ENGINEER (and ENGINEER's independent professional associates and consultants), pursuant to this Agreement are instruments of service in respect of the Project and ENGINEER shall retain an ownership and property interest therein whether or not the Project is completed. OWNER may make and retain copies for,information and reference in connection with the use and occupancy of the Project by OWNER and others; however, such documents are not intended or represented to be suitable for reuse by OWNER or others on extensions of the Project or on any other project. Any reuse without 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, or to ENGINEER's independent professional associates or consultants, and OWNER SHALL INDEMNIFY AND HOLD HARMLESS ENGINEER AND ENGINEER'S INDEPENDENT PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATES AND CONSULTANTS FROM ALL CLAIMS, DAMAGES, LOSSES AND EXPENSES INCLUDING ATTORNEY'S FEES ARISING OUT OF OR RESULTING THEREFROM. Any such verification or adaptation will entitle ENGINEER to further compensation at rates to be agreed upon by OWNER and ENGINEER. 6.3. Insurance. 6.3.1. ENGINEER shall procure and maintain Worker's Compensation and Employer's Liability Insurance for protection from claims under the workers' compensation act. PAGE - 13 5;�- 114 6.3.2. To the extent that professional liability insurance is and remains available at commercially reasonable rates,ENGINEER will maintain Professional Liability Insurance to protect the OWNER from damages, loss or liability arising out of the performance of professional services under this Agreement. Such coverage shall be in the sum of not less than ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00). 6.3.3. UPON WRITTEN REQUEST OF OWNER RECEIVED WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS OF THE ACCEPTANCE THEREOF, ENGINEER WILL PROVIDE PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY INSURANCE ADDITIONAL TO THE AMOUNT OF COVERAGE STATED IN PARAGRAPH 6.3.2., IF AVAILABLE, AND THE OWNER WILL REIMBURSE ENGINEER FOR THE COSTS INCURRED BY ENGINEER IN OBTAINING SUCH INCREASED COVERAGE. TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW, OWNER AGREES THAT ENGINEER's LIABILITY TO OWNER FOR ANY DAMAGES, LOSSES, INJURIES, CLAIMS, LIABILITY, OR INDEMNITY COMMITMENTS ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF ENGINEER's PERFORMANCE OF THIS AGREEMENT, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ENGINEER's NEGLIGENCE, ERRORS, OMISSIONS, STRICT LIABILITY, BREACH OF CONTRACT OR BREACH OF WARRANTY, IS LIMITED TO ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00), UNLESS OWNER SHALL ELECT TO REQUEST THAT ADDITIONAL COVERAGE BE PURCHASED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS HEREIN. IN NO EVENT SHALL ENGINEER BE LIABLE FOR ANY INDIRECT, SPECIAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL LOSS OR DAMAGE ARISING OUT OF SERVICES HEREUNDER, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO LOSS OF USE, LOSS OF PROFIT OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION, WHETHER CAUSED BY ENGINEER, OR OTHERWISE, AND, TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW. 6.4. OWNER's Responsibility to ENGINEER. 6.4.1. Hazardous Waste and Asbestos. Because of the unavailability of professional liability insurance for services involving or related to hazardous waste elements, or the removal or encapsulation of asbestos, and because of the severity of claims relating to these services, the ENGINEER is unwilling to perform any services related to the disposal of hazardous waste elements or the removal or encapsulation of asbestos. For any project site which has existing improvements and on which the ENGINEER, his consultants, agents, or employees are to provide design services, the OWNER will conduct, utilizing either its own employees, or a consultant employed for that purpose, a survey to determine the presence of any hazardous waste element or asbestos on the project site. If any hazardous waste elements or asbestos is discovered at the project site, either during the initial study or at any time during construction, the OWNER shall immediately relieve the ENGINEER of any obligations to continue to perform services under this agreement and shall proceed with the remediation of the project site as may be required under state or federal law. THE OWNER HEREBY AGREES TO RELEASE THE ENGINEER, ITS CONSULTANTS, AGENTS AND EMPLOYEES, PAGE - 14 FROM ANY CLAIMS, DAMAGES, LOSSES AND EXPENSES, DIRECT OR INDIRECT, INCLUDING BUT NOT IMMTED TO ATTORNEY'S FEES AND COURT COSTS, ARISING OUT OF, RESULTING FROM, OR RELATED TO, THE PRESENCE OR RELEASE OF ANY HAZARDOUS WASTE ELEMENTS OR THE REMOVAL OR ENCAPSULATION OF ANY ASBESTOS ON ANY PROJECT SITE IN WHICH THE ENGINEER HAS BEEN RETAINED TO PERFORM SERVICES ON BEHALF OF THE OWNER. 6.5. ENGINEER's Indemnification of OWNER. 6.5.1. EXCEPT AS PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPHS 2.2.8, 6.2 AND 6.4.1., THE ENGINEER SHALL INDEMNIFY THE OWNER, ITS CONSULTANTS, AGENTS AND EMPLOYEES FROM AND AGAINST ANY AND ALL CLAIMS, DAMAGES, LOSSES AND EXPENSES, DIRECT OR INDIRECT, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO FEES AND CHARGES OF ATTORNEYS AND COURT AND ARBITRATION COSTS ARISING OUT OF, RESULTING FROM, OR RELATED TO THE NEGLIGENT PERFORMANCE OF WORK BY ENGINEER SPECIFIED IN THIS AGREEMENT. 6.6. Severability and Reformation. 6.6.1. Any provision or part thereof of this agreement held to be void or unenforceable under any law shall be deemed stricken, and all remaining provisions shall continue to be valid and binding upon the parties. The parties agree that this agreement shall be reformed to replace such stricken provision or part thereof with a valid and enforceable provision which comes as close as possible to expressing the intention of the stricken provision. 6.7. Controlling Law. This Agreement is to be governed by the laws of the State of Texas. The venue for any action brought pursuant to or resulting from the terms of this agreement shall lie in Tarrant County, Texas. 6.8. Successors and Assigns. 6.8.1. OWNER and ENGINEER each is hereby bound and the partners, successors, executors, administrators and legal representatives of OWNER and ENGINEER (and to the extent permitted by Paragraph 6.8.2. the assigns of OWNER and ENGINEER), are hereby bound to the other party to this Agreement and to the partners, successors, executors, administrators and legal representatives (and said assigns), of such other party, in respect of all covenants, agreements and obligations of this Agreement. PAGE - 15 J- -16 6.8.2. Unless specifically stated to the contrary in any written consent to an assignment, no assignment will release or discharge the assignor from any duty or responsibility under this Agreement. Nothing contained in this paragraph shall prevent ENGINEER from employing such independent professional associates and consultants as ENGINEER may deem appropriate to assist in the performance of services hereunder. 6.8.3. Nothing under this Agreement shall be construed to give any rights or benefits in this Agreement to anyone other than OWNER and ENGINEER, and all duties and responsibilities undertaken pursuant to this Agreement will be for the sole and exclusive benefit of OWNER and ENGINEER and not for the benefit of any other party. 6.9. Standard of Care. 6.9.1. ENGINEER shall perform for or furnish to OWNER professional engineering and related services in all phases of the Project to which this Agreement applies as hereinbefore provided. ENGINEER shall serve as OWNER's prime design professional and engineering representative for the Project providing professional engineering consultation and advice with respect thereto. ENGINEER may employ such ENGINEER's Consultants as ENGINEER deems necessary to assist in the performance or furnishing of professional engineering and related services hereunder. ENGINEER shall not be required to employ any ENGINEER'S Consultant unacceptable to ENGINEER. 6.9.2. The standard of care for all professional engineering and related services performed or furnished by ENGINEER under this Agreement will be the care and skill ordinarily used by members of ENGINEER's profession practicing under similar conditions at the same time and in the same locality. ENGINEER MAKES NO REPRESENTATIONS OR WARRANTIES, EITHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, EXCEPT FOR THOSE MADE IN THIS AGREEMENT. SECTION 7 - SPECIAL PROVISIONS, EXHIBITS and SCHEDULES. 7.1. The following Exhibits are attached to and made a part of this Agreement: 7.1.1. Exhibit A "Hourly Rates for Additional Services" consisting of one (1) page. 7.1.2. Exhibit B "Scope of Services, DOVE ROAD RECONSTRUCTION - White Chapel Rd. to Kimball Rd. consisting of eight (8) pages. 7.1.3. Exhibit C "Compensation to Engineer and Time of Completion" consisting of two (2) pages. PAGE - 16 Jr�- 17 7.2. THIS AGREEMENT (consisting of pages 1 to 17, inclusive), together with Exhibits and Schedules identified above, constitutes the entire agreement between OWNER and ENGINEER and supersedes all prior written or oral understandings. This Agreement and said Exhibits and Schedules may only be amended, supplemented, modified, or canceled by a duly executed written instrument. THE OWNER AND ENGINEER EACH ACKNOWLEDGE BY THE EXECUTION OF THIS AGREEMENT THAT NEITHER THE OWNER NOR THE ENGINEER HAS MADE ANY REPRESENTATIONS OR HAS MADE ANY EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES NOT CONTAINED IN THIS AGREEMENT. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have made and executed this Agreement as of the day and year first above written. OWNER: ENGINEER: CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS RADY & ASSOCIATES, INC. BY: BY: Gary Fickes Derrell E. Johnson, P.E. Mayor President Address for giving notices: Address for giving notices: 667 North Carroll Avenue 910 Collier Street Southlake, Tx 76092 Fort Worth, TX 76102 PAGE - 17 Sx_ i� EXHIBIT A HOURLY RATES FOR ADDITIONAL SERVICES The following hourly rates will apply to services as outlined in paragraph 1.2.2 of the Standard Professional Services Agreement Between Owner and Engineer. These rates will remain in effect until they are increased or decreased in accordance with paragraph 1.2.2.4. Principal $110.00 Project Manager 85.00 Senior Engineer 80.00 Senior Architect 80.00 Engineer 65.00 Architect 65.00 Designer 55.00 Technician 48.00 Draftsman 40.00 Clerical 35.00 Survey Party (3-man) 150.00 Computer Usage 25.00 `5 X-is EXHIBIT B SCOPE OF SERVICES DOVE ROAD RECONSTRUCTION White Chapel Rd. to Kimball Rd. A. PHASE ONE - STUDY AND REPORT 1. Team Buildine: Re-introduce the Rady team to City staff and begin the team building process by including the survey and geotechnical consultants in the initial planning of the project. 2. Data Collection and Analysis: The Engineer shall analyze background information relevant to the project and collected by the City of Southlake, including property and topographic maps, plats, maps and plans of water, sewer, streets, drainage, USGS benchmarks, and City standard details and notes to be placed on Construction Documents. The City will assist in the collection of franchise utility and pipeline company maps and construction plans, if available, by contacting local representatives. 3. Develop Standard Format for CAD Deliverables: Ascertain City's expectations for computer generated construction drawings. Considerations include, but are not limited to, layering system, standard title block, and drawing scales. 4. Design Survey: The Engineer shall provide field surveys necessary to prepare Study and Report exhibits and Final Design of the proposed improvements. The survey shall include the following: a. Set three (3) permanent primary horizontal and vertical (G.P.S.) control stations. One near each end of the project and one near the midpoint. Coordinate system shall be based on the State Plane Coordinate System. b. Make a topographic survey of existing features that may pertain to construction activities. Features shall include, but not be limited to, telephone poles, power poles, other visible utilities located on or above the surface, fences, retaining walls, water meters, manholes, vaults, sprinkler heads, and other permanent or temporary structures. C. Abstracting plats and properties from the Tarrant County Courthouse for purposes of identifying property description, current ownership, street ,5) -,zo City of Southlake Exhibit B - Scope of Services Page 2. address and legal address of properties along Dove Road, adjacent to the proposed improvements. d. Survey cross-sections at a maximum of 50-foot intervals of the existing roadway for use during the design and calculation of construction quantities. 5. Geotechnical Investigation: The Engineer shall retain the services of a qualified geotechnical engineering firm to obtain soil borings and perform the laboratory analyses of the samples obtained to facilitate the determination of the general characteristics and classification of the soil in the project area. The geotechnical engineer shall prepare a report recommending any special requirements for excavation or embedment of below ground/underground structures, foundation requirements for underground structures, and soillrock classification for use by contractors during the bidding phase of the project. a. Drill 18 borings to 5-foot depth, and 2 borings to 15-foot depth at the Dove Creek culvert. Backfill/patch bore holes at completion. b. Laboratory Investigation will include: • Moisture content and laboratory classifications; • Liquid and Plastic Limit determination; • Lime Series; • Cement Series; • Unconfined compressive strength tests; and • Unit weight determinations. C. Engineering Analysis and Report: • General soil and groundwater conditions; • Recommendations for foundation type, depth and allowable loading for drainage improvement structures; • comments on existing pavement components and the potential for their reclamation; • Pavement subgrade stabilization recommendations; and • Earthwork recommendations. 5 X-112/ City of Southlake Exhibit B - Scope of Services Page 3. 6. Horizontal and Vertical Alignment Alternatives: a. Develop the proposed horizontal and vertical alignment alternatives of Dove Rd. from White Chapel Rd. to Kimball Rd. using the Design Survey information. The alignment alternatives will be based on a 22 foot wide street section and within the existing right-of-way. Intersection re-alignment alternatives will show additional right-of-way requirements if needed. Each alternative will include a preliminary construction cost projection. b. Determine the centerline/baseline alignment using AASHTO design guidelines for horizontal and vertical sight and stopping distances. C. Analyze drainage patterns within street right-of-way to convey runoff to existing outfall locations. d. Meet with City staff to determine areas of conflict between alignment alternatives and right-of-way needs. Coordination of design alternatives to be presented in the Report. 7. Street Section Alternatives: Evaluate the street section design alternatives and include preliminary cost projections for each. 8. Construction Phasing and Sequencing_ Construction phasing and sequencing of design alternatives will be investigated and coordinated with City staff. Specific attention will be given to the possibility of more than one construction contract to facilitate faster construction phases. 9. Utility Coordination: Identification of known utilities existing within the project limits and potential conflicts. The Engineer shall assist the City in coordinating the relocation of franchise or other utilities not owned by the City. The Engineer shall provide preliminary roadway plans to affected utilities. Preparation of contract documents for the relocation of any franchise or city utilities is not included as part of Fee Engineering Services. 10. Staff Review: The preliminary design alternatives, street sections, and projected construction costs will be presented to, and discussed with, the City staff. Any preliminary design refinements necessary prior to public presentation will be identified. City of Southlake Exhibit B - Scope of Services Page 4. 11. Report: Prepare and present a report describing the technical approach, findings, conclusions, and recommendations for review by the City staff. The report shall include appropriate exhibits for use in presentation. 12. Presentations and Public Forums: Upon approval of the Report by City Staff, the Engineer shall attend and participate in a public hearing to present the preliminary design alternatives for the project to the City Council and the citizens of the City. The Engineer shall prepare presentation graphics for use at the public hearing as deemed necessary by the Engineer to communicate information to the public and the Engineer shall participate in the presentation as deemed appropriate by the City staff. 13. Selection of the preliminary design alternatives must be approved in writing by the City prior to the Engineer commencing with the preparation of final plans and contract documents. 14. The Engineer will provide to franchise utilities, copies of the selected design alternatives and any anticipated relocation information available at that time to facilitate relocation design plans. B. PHASE TWO - FINAL DESIGN 1. Based on the preferred alternative concept and written authorization from the City to proceed, the Engineer will undertake final design on the selected improvements. 2. Advise the City as to whether additional data or services of the type described in the Study and Report Phase are required, and coordinate with the City the scope and fees associated with the required services. Actual performance of the additional services is not included as part of Fee Engineering Services. 3. Final Plans and Specifications: The Engineer shall prepare final plans and specifications for the selected horizontal and vertical alignment, and street cross-section that shall include the following: a. Final alignment of the proposed street improvements, intersection geometry, drive approaches, horizontal curve data with beginning and ending stations and centerline geometry. �"� a3 City of Southlake Exhibit B - Scope of Services Page 5. b. Final vertical alignment of Dove Rd. and cross-street transitions using Design Survey data. Station profile grade at the proposed centerline of Dove Rd. on 50 foot intervals. C. Design for maintenance of existing storm drainage conveyance capacity and extension of cross-drainage structures for improved safety. Final alignment of the proposed drainage improvements, including civil and structural design of the Dove Creek multiple box culvert extension. d. Cover sheet with project location map. e. Final plan and profile sheets for this project shall be prepared on single plan and profile sheets at a scale of 1" equals 40 feet (horizontal) and 1" equals 4 feet (vertical). f. Technical specifications not included in the standard specifications. g. Miscellaneous non-standard details and typical sections shall be included in the plans. Standard details provided by the City shall be incorporated as furnished, upon review by the Engineer, and shall not be computer generated nor modified as part of the basic services included under this contract. h. Contract documents including notice to bidders; special instructions to bidders; bid form; standard form of agreement; standard performance, payment, and maintenance bonds; sample certificate of insurance form; special provisions; and standard details. The Engineer shall prepare the contract documents utilizing the North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG) Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction, including the general conditions of agreement. Technical Specifications shall be based on NCTCOG and any supplemental specifications. i. The final design plans and contract documents shall be sealed and signed by a Professional Engineer licensed in the State of Texas. j. The final design plans shall be prepared on AutoCAD® Release 12 or greater utilizing the Engineer's standard layering system. Special specifications for AutoCAD® production of plans shall be incorporated in the project as part of the basic services at the Engineer's discretion. City of Southlake Exhibit B - Scope of Services Page 6. Customization of the Engineer's standard layering system shall be considered as additional services to the contract. 4. Final Cost Projection: The Engineer shall prepare and present to the City along with the final plans and contract documents a final cost projection for construction of the proposed improvements. The Engineer's cost projection shall be based upon the most recently available cost data for projects of a similar nature and scope and the professional judgment of the Engineer. The cost projection shall not be considered a guarantee of the construction cost of the project or the bids that may be received on the project. 5. City Review: Upon completion of the final plans and contract documents, the Engineer shall present two complete sets of the construction documents to the City staff for review. Upon completion of the final review by the City, the Engineer shall review the City's comments and incorporate the appropriate revisions into the final documents prior to the bidding phase. For review purposes the Engineer shall submit three (3) copies of the plans and specifications to the City. These will be reviewed and checked by the City and one (1) copy returned to the Engineer with the desired corrections noted. Each set of plans shall be stamped "Preliminary" and dated by the Engineer until the final approval of the plans by the City, whereupon the word "Preliminary" shall be omitted and the plans shall be stamped "Final" on the cover sheet and dated by the Engineer. 6. Utility Coordination: The Engineer shall distribute to utility companies, including but not limited to, franchised utilities and pipeline companies which have facilities within the limits of the Project, construction plans for the Project. The Engineer shall obtain from the utility companies, their best estimate of time required for any necessary relocations and provide the City with the same. The Engineer shall coordinate with the utility companies any proposed improvements, either on the surface, below the surface, or above the surface, that may be affected by the Project. This will include, but not be limited to, franchised utilities and pipeline companies which have facilities within the limits of the Project. The Engineer shall not be responsible for acting as the City's representative during such coordination and shall serve strictly as a liaison between the utilities and the City for the purposes of such activities. �,f -a.5-- City of Southlake Exhibit B - Scope of Services Page 7. D. PHASE THREE - BIDDING 1. Advertisement for Bids: The Engineer shall, upon approval of the final plans and contract documents, prepare the construction documents for advertisement and bidding. The Notice to Bidders shall be submitted to the Director of Public Works for submittal to the newspaper of record of the City for publication to advertise bids to be received on a date acceptable to the City. Upon determination of the bid date, the Engineer shall print thirty (30) sets of the final construction documents, forward copies of the construction documents to a maximum of four (4) local contractor organizations to be placed on file, and be responsible for the issuance of sets of documents to interested contractors from the Engineer's office. The City shall be furnished five (5) sets of final documents for use by the staff and placement on file with the Purchasing Agent during the bidding process. All costs for printing of the thirty (30) sets of final construction documents shall be the responsibility of the Engineer. Engineer shall retain all receipts from the issuance of contract documents to interested contractors. Additional copies will be printed at the request of the City as a reimbursable expense. 2. Addenda: Issuing addenda as appropriate to interpret, clarify, or expand the bidding documents. 3. O_pening of Bids: The Engineer shall attend the bid opening and assist in the receipt and opening of bids if desired by the City staff. Upon completion of the opening of bids the Engineer shall retain the bid documents for the purposes of tabulation and evaluation of the bids. 4. Bid Tabulation and Recommendation of Award: The Engineer shall tabulate the bids received to verify the low bid and other bids and shall review the experience and qualifications of the low bidder to ascertain the ability of the contractor to adequately perform the work proposed. Upon review of the low bidder's experience, qualifications, bid submitted and bonds, the Engineer shall make a written recommendation of award of the contract, complete with a tabulation of the bids, to the City for consideration by the staff and City Council. 5. Preparation of Contract Documents: Upon award of the contract, the Engineer shall furnish and prepare six sets of contract documents for execution by the contractor and City. The Engineer shall forward said documents to the contractor for execution and insertion of bonds and when returned, the Engineer shall review the documents for completion and compliance with the City of Southlake ''r.• Exhibit B - Scope of Services Page 8. requirements of the contract prior to forwarding the documents to the City for execution. E. CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION 1. Pre-Construction Conference: The Engineer shall participate in a pre- construction conference with representatives of the City, the contractor and necessary utility companies. The purpose of this conference shall be to establish the conditions under which the work will be performed, identify the individuals involved in the construction and construction administration, the utility company representatives and others that may be involved, determine the construction schedule and develop a working relationship early in the project. 2. Construction Observation: The Engineer shall visit the project site to observe the general progress and character of the work in progress and determine in general if construction is proceeding in accordance with the Construction Documents. The basic services of this contract shall include a maximum of �••- one visit per week to the project site during construction at an average of three hours per visit. 3. Other Construction Services: The Engineer shall be available to provide interpretation of the plans, review of shop drawings, submittals, and construction materials testing, and review of periodic pay requests by the Contractor when desired by the City. 4. Final Punch List and Recommendation of Agcotance• Upon substantial completion of construction, the Engineer shall participate in a final walk- through and punch list of the project to assist in developing a list of deficiencies to be corrected by the contractor prior to final acceptance. Upon completion of the punch list, the Engineer shall recommend acceptance of the project in writing to the City staff. 5. Record Drawings: The Engineer shall prepare a reproducible set of drawings of the project reflecting the contractor's construction records. Upon completion of the drawings, the Engineer shall review the same and forward one set of reproducible record drawings and the record drawing AutoCAD® files to the City. 5�-a � EXHIBIT C COMPENSATION TO ENGINEER AND TIME FOR COMPLETION A. PHASE ONE - STUDY AND REPORT Basic Services - For all services listed in the Scope of Services for Phase One, the City shall pay the Engineer a lump sum fee of $48,765.00. Schedule of Services - Upon written authorization to proceed, the Engineer shall complete all Phase One services and be prepared for City Council meeting within ten (10) weeks. This schedule assumes timely review by city staff and availability of data necessary to complete Phase One services. B. PHASE TWO - FINAL DESIGN Basic Services - For all services selected by the City based on the preferred alternative concept in the Scope of Services for Phase Two, the City shall pay the Engineer a lump sum fee ranging from $14,000.00 to $23,500.00. The City and Engineer shall mutually establish the final lump sum fee based upon the City's selection of design study alternatives. Schedule of Services - Upon selection and written approval of the preliminary design alternatives and authorization to proceed, the Engineer shall complete all Phase Three services and submit Preliminary Plans and Contract Documents for review within a four (4) to eight (8) week time frame. The City and Engineer shall mutually establish the final schedule of services based upon the City's selection of design study alternatives. This schedule assumes timely performance of City reviews. Following the final review by the City, the Engineer shall complete all necessary corrections within one (1) week and prepare the Final Plans and Construction Documents for bidding. C. PHASE THREE - BIDDING Basic Services - For all services listed in the Scope of Services for Phase Three, the City shall pay the Engineer a lump sum fee ranging from $2,900.00 to $6,200.00. The City and Engineer shall mutually establish the final lump sum fee based upon the City's selection of design study alternatives. Schedule of Services - Due to the nature of the bidding phase of a project, no time limitation of the Engineer's services shall be identified herein. e City of Sou'thlake Exhibit C - Compensation to Engineer Page 2. D. PHASE FOUR - CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION Basic Services - For all services listed in the Scope of Services for Phase Four, the City shall pay the Engineer a lump sum fee ranging from $5,900.00 to $12,500. The City and Engineer shall mutually establish the final lump sum fee based upon the City's selection of design study alternatives. Schedule of Services - Due to the nature of the construction phase of a project, no time limitation of the Engineer's services shall be identified herein. E. SUMMARY OF FEES (Range of fees for all services selected by the City based on the preferred alternative concept) Reclamation Reconstruction Phase (1 Construction Contract) (2 Construction Contracts) Study - Fee: $48,765.00 $48,765.00 Final Design - Fee $14,000.00 $23,500.00 Bidding - Fee $2,900.00 $6,200.00 Construction - Fee $5,900.00 $12,500.00 TOTAL FEE: $71,565.00 $90,965.00 Ski -a9 _ FIELDING, BARRETT & TAYLOR, L.L.P. ATTORNEYS 3400 BANK ONE TOWER 500 THROCKMORTON STREET(4m." TELEPHONE(817) 332-2580 �' 1 FORT WORTH,TEXAS 76102-3821 1 (' FAX(817)3324740 j t ANALESUE MUNCY i' ' MAR 2 91994 1:. l: 1i March 25, 1994 Mr. Curtis Hawk City of Southlake 667 N. Carroll Avenue Southlake, Texas 76092 Re: Regulation of Basic Cable Rates Dear Mr. Hawk: On February 22, 1994 the FCC issued an Executive Summary of its revised rate regulation rules. The actual text of the rules should be available soon. Both the city and the cable operator will need time after that happens to review the changes. I attended a seminar put on by the FCC on March 23, 1994 in Kansas City, to obtain needed information to assist in the review process. It is our recommendation that the City Council extend the 30 day deadline to review the rates submitted by the cable operator in accordance with the attached resolution. This resolution will give the City an additional 150 days to review the new regulations issued by the FCC and to determine whether the rates submitted by the cable operator are within the FCC benchmark rates. This resolution should be placed on the next city council agenda. I have enclosed a summary of the revised regulations as they were described in the Executive Summary. Please call if you have any questions. Sincerel un 40, . Analeslle M cy TH:mjw f.\files\muni\cable\bcrdtr INFORMATION FROM FCC EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Notices and Regulations Adopted by the FCC Pursuant to The Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992 February 22, 1994 After having extended the rate freeze to May 15, 1994, in an announcement made on February 14, 1994, the FCC issued an Executive Summary of its revised rate regulation rules on February 22, 1994. The Executive Summary provides only a general idea of the substance of the rules and leaves many questions unanswered. The FCC is required to make the actual rules available within 30 days of the release of the summary, and until that happens, regulatory processes that have already begun under the present rules appear to be in limbo. Throughout ne summary, such words are used as "lightened burdens", "streamlined", "preserve incentives", "creative new programming",and"simplify procedures." This may indicate good intentions on the part of the FCC, but operators and local authorities alike, may have difficulty in finding these worthy goals accomplished. From the information available, the revised rules appear to add a layer of complexity rather than simplify. Presented below are a few of the significant matters discussed in the Executive Summary. These descriptions should not be used as a basis for making any regulatory decisions. The information is too sketchy to rely on for taking action. It merely gives an indication of the impact the revised regulations will have on the regulatory process. Major Items Addressed (1) Revised Competitive Differential. Noncompetitive cable systems will be required to set their rates at a level equal to their September 30, 1992 rates minus a revised competitive differential of 17% or to the new benchmark, whichever is less. Otherwise they may invoke cost of service procedures. (2) Phased Implementation Program. Systems with relatively low prices (defined as systems whose rates would be below the benchmark after subtracting the 17% from their September 30, 1992 rates or reducing their rates to the new benchmark) and systems owned by small operators (defined as operators serving a total subscriber base of 15,000 or fewer and that are not owned or controlled by larger companies) will not be required to reduce their rates immediately by the full differential. Rather, while further studies are being conducted, these systems will calculate the extent to which their rate reduction falls short of 17%. This "reduction deficit" will be offset against any inflation adjustment. (3) Calculation of External Costs under Price Cap.The inflation adjustment has been separated from external costs. A form will be released for making the calculations. Compulsory copyright fees incurred by carrying distant broadcast signals will also be treated as external costs. ""t►tr Fleldlug,Barrett&Taylor,L.P.P. Fort Worth,Texas �� Page 1 (4) "A La Carte" Packages. Premium and pay-per-view channels are referred to as "A La Carte" Packages. The FCC has determined that its previous exemption of these channels from regulation needs to be "refined." To ensure against use of the these channels to avoid rate regulation, the FCC will consider certain factors and may determine that some packages should not qualify for nonregulated treatment. (5) Small Systems. The FCC lifted the stay of rate regulation for small cable systems (defined as systems serving 1,000 or fewer subscribers). Small, noncompetitive systems will be subject to rate regulation. To reduce the burdens on small systems, the FCC adopted two types of administrative relief (a) It suspended the requirement for unbundling equipment and installation charges, and permitted an across-the-board reduction in each individual regulated rate separately billed by the operator. This will allow small systems to reduce overajl rates and the rate for each regulated component by the revised competitive differential, without the need io codnpiete a Form 353 or eo prepare a cost-of- service showing. (i) This relief is available to independently owned small systems and small systems owned by small operators. (ii) Small operator is defined as an operator that has 250.000 or fewer total subscribers, owns only systems with fewer than 10,000 subscribers each, and has an average system size of 1,000 or fewer subscribers. (b) Larger operators of small systems (defined as operators that own more than one cable system, one of which has 1,000 or fewer subscribers, and are not a small operators) may use the average equipment costs of their small systems in setting rates in individual franchise areas. (c) The FCC will give further relief to small systems by developing an average equipment cost schedule to be used by all small systems to unbundle equipment and installation revenues. (6) Rate Determination when channels are added or deleted. FCC has adopted a new method for determining rates when channels are added or deleted. After applying the revised competitive differential an operator will adjust its per channel rates to reflect the proportionate decrease in per channel rates based on the total number of regulated channels. Under this approach, operators must pass on to subscribers the efficiencies and economies of scale that arise as operators add channels to their systems. (a) Programming costs will be treated as external costs so that operators will be able to recover the full amount of programming expenses associated with added channels. Operators may also recover a mark-up on their programming expenses. (b) The FCC stated that this methodology will protect subscribers on one tier from having their rates raised by changes on other tiers. Fielding,Barrett&Taylor,L.P.P. Fort Worth,Texas IU Page 2 (c) An FCC form will be released to make calculations under this methodology. (7) Systems with More Than 100 Channels. The FCC is seeking comments on whether it should establish a benchmark methodology for adjusting capped rates when a cable system carries more than 100 regulated channels, and if so, what that methodology should be. (8) Cost of Service Rate Showings. The FCC issued interim rules to govern cost of service proceedings initiated by cable operators. The method is a traditional cost of service approach similar to those the FCC applies to the telephone industry. Included is a provision for "streamlined" showings by small systems. The FCC is seeking comment on whether these rules should be adopted as permanent. Areas of Clarification The Executive Summary lists areas of rate regulation and tier buy-through provisions which will be clarified when the full text is released. The following are some of the points of particular interest: (1) Effective Competition. A system will not be exempted from regulation if its percentage of coverage is low because a large number of households are unoccupied. There is no mention of clarification of whether households to which cable is unavailable are counted. (2) Buy-Through Provisions. The FCC affirmed that the prohibition on operators requiring subscribers to purchase anything other than the basic service tier in order to obtain access to programming offered on a per channel or per program basis, applies to all cable systems, including those that are not subject to rate regulation. (3) Certification of Local Authorities. The FCC affirmed that it will not, in most circumstances, regulate basic cable service where local authorities have chosen not to. In any request for FCC regulation, the local authority will be required to demonstrate that proceeds from franchise fees will not cover the cost of rate regulation. Local authorities will be allowed to voluntarily withdraw their certifications if they determined that regulation is no longer in the best interest of local cable subscribers and they have received no consideration in exchange for their decision to decertify. (4) Basic Rate Regulation. The following are some actions taken with regard to franchising authorities' basic rate regulation: (a) FCC will make cost determinations for the basic service tier, when requested by local authorities who have limited resources. (b) Franchising authorities may delegate their rate regulation responsibilities to a local commission. Fielding,Barrett&Taylor,L.P.P. Fort Worth,Texas Page 3 (c) FCC affirms that operators may not enter into settlement agreements with local authorities outside the scope of the FCC's rate regulations. (d) FCC modifies its position on proprietary information obtained from operators and determines that confidentiality of information will be governed by local law. (e) Clarifies that franchising authorities are entitled to request information from the operator that is reasonably necessary to support assertions made by the operator on Form 393 or in a cost of service showing and that they may impose forfeitures and fines for violations of their rules, orders, or decisions. (f) Clarifies that when refunds are ordered, the local authority must promptly return overpayments of franchise fees to operators that result from diminished gross revenues after refunds (or allow operators to deduct overpayments from future payments). (g) Modifies the rules to require that operators comply with franchising authorities' requests for information. (5) Form 393. The follow actions were taken regarding Form 393: (a) If operator fails to file Form 393, the local authority may consider the operator in default, find the operator's rates are unreasonable, and order appropriate relief, including refunds and prospective rate reduction. (b) Local authority may order the filing of supplemental information and the deadline to rule on rates will be suspended pending the receipt of the additional information. (c) Clarifies that local authorities have discretion to resolve questions or ambiguities regarding the application of the rate-setting process to individual circumstances and that, if challenged on appeal, the FCC will defer to the local authority's decision if supported by a reasonable basis. (6) Evasions of Rate Regulations. The FCC identifies the following practices as possible evasions or violations of the rate regulations and tier buy-throLgh prohibition: (a) Moving groups of programming offered in tiered packages to a la carte; (b) Collapsing multiple tiers of service into the basic tier; (c) Charging for services previously provided without extra charge unless the value of that service, as now reflected in the new charges, was taken out of their basic rate number when calculating the reduction necessary to establish reasonable rates; (d) Assessing downgrade charges for service packages that were added without a subscriber's explicit consent. Fleldlag,Barrett&Taylor,L.P.P. Fort Worth,Texas 5+r, / Page 4 J/r'tl�� I RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION TOLLING THE 30 DAY DEADLINE FOR REVIEWING THE CABLE TELEVISION RATES OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE WHEREAS, the City of Southlake has prescribed in Ordinance No. 594 the process for local regulation of the basic tier of cable television service provided by Harron Cable TV, which includes established deadlines for submissions and decisions; and WHEREAS, additional time is required for determining if the rates submitted are within the Federal Communication Commission's permitted basic service tier charges; and WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 594 and the Federal Communications Commission's regulations allow for tolling the 30 day deadline for review of a cost of service showing an additional 150 days beginning 4/14/94: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE: SECTION 1. The City Council orders that the 30 day deadline to review the cost of service showing submitted by Harron Cable TV is tolled for an additional 150 days beginning 4/14/94. SECTION 2. The city attorney shall notify the company of this order by sending a copy of this resolution to the company by certified mail, return receipt requested. SECTION 3. This resolution shall take effect from and after its adoption, and it is accordingly so resolved. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY f:\files\muni\slake\cable\cablreg.res �-�_6. City of Southlake,Texas M. EM0RANDUM j March 31, 1994 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Karen P. Gandy, Zoning Administrator SUBJECT: ZA 94-17 Rezoning and Concept Plan/Southlake Hills East/ Second Reading, Ordinance No. 480-115 REQUESTED ACTION: Rezoning and Concept Plan approval for 11.455 acres situated in the James Thornhill Survey, Abstract No. 1505, Tracts 1A3A, 1A5, 1A7, 1E, and 1E1A. LOCATION: Approximately 300' North of West Continental Blvd. , East of Southlake Hills, Phase 1, West of Timber Lake Addition, and South of Southlake Hills, Phase 2 . OWNERS/APPLICANT: Conn-Anderson, Inc. CURRENT ZONING: "AG" Agricultural REQUESTED ZONING: "SF-20A" Single Family-20A Residential LAND USE CATEGORY: Medium Density Residential NO. NOTICES SENT: Nineteen (19) RESPONSES: One (1) response was received in favor: * Mr. Pat Livingston, 1007 & 1009 South Lake Hills Dr. Note the attached letters from William Bell and Kurt Miller (including signatures from Margaret McClendon, Christine Hancock, J. Osburn, c. Hjorth and James T. Bradley) who are all opposed to the realignment of Hidden Knoll Court as recommended by Staff's Exhibit 'A' ) . P & Z ACTION: March 3, 1994; Approved (5-0) ZA 94-17 subject to the Plan Review Summary dated February 25, 1994 and deleting item #5 (alternative street alignment - Exhibit 'A' ) . COUNCIL ACTION: March 15, 1994; Approved (4-0) 1st Reading of Ordinance No. 480-115 with the second Plan Review Summary dated March 11, 1994 deleting #1 (to allow Hidden Knoll Ct. as presented by the applicant. ) STAFF COMMENTS: The applicant has met all the review comments of the second Plan Review Summary dated March 11, 1994 with the exception of those items addressed in the attached third Plan Review Summary dated March 31, 1994. M f� KPG/gj c:\wpf\memo\cases\94-17.R&C 'lA-I March 3, 1994 City of Southlake Planning & Zoning Commission 667 N. Carroll Ave. Southlake, TX 76092 Ref: No. 2A 94-17 Gentlemen: Thank you for this opportunity to say that I am clearly opposed to the proposed zoning change. My family and I escaped from Dallas over fourteen years ago, to be rid of the traffic, the noise, the crime and the pollution. We came here to spend the rest of our lives, and have been good citizens and proud residents of Southlake. However, shortly after our arrival I realized the inevitable: Southlake was the ideal place to live considering the schools, the location and the country atmosphere. That was the good news. The bad news was that I knew, in time, change would come because others would be attracted for the same reasons. As a result, I have long since resigned myself to these changes, and I have reluctantly agreed to the original zoning change. I believe this plan is sensitive to the needs and desires of the old- time residents like my neighbors and my family, and still satisfies the growth needs of Southlake and our new neighbors. However, only a few days ago I was informed by a representative of Conn-Anderson Company that the City Council had proposed an alternative plan (Exhibit A). This plan is absolutely unacceptable, as it will destroy what we have left of our privacy and our landscape, and will bring about all the things I escaped from when I decided to make Southlake my home. Surely the City will understand my objections, and not allow progress and growth to be at the total expense of its present residents. Your careful consideration of my request will be greatly appreciated. Respectfully, William W. Bell WWB/cc A- Z I_II1 II I- 1 i r' 'I'+- ._ r'I_ : IJ 1= . = _ 11 14 1fli7 .t_1l_l I' .� 1 KI.li171). NIii_i.G_A 1196 VV'. ContinOrdal Southlake,Texas 76092 (B17) d8.1-6941 October 15, 1993 Mr . and Mrs. Wit1lam Bell 1200 W. Conr.ine'n:al Blvd, Scuthlake, Texas 76092 Dear Bi l 1 and Ka-t, Anita has inform-id me of the correspondence she. received yesterday where a develope,- has scheduled a meeting to discuss widening of the north easement in the 12.00 block of, best Continental Boulevard. Regrettably, i will not be: able to .attend this meeting, however 1 will provide you pith my thoughts on the i .sue. It is my understanding thet this i5 a priv;y,te easement that fewer has been dedicato.d to the City of S-authlake, • Mr. Bradley has. done an excellent job of mainteining the easenvient without any assistance fc.,rm the City. ;hou 1 d the developer Ash Lo access his property and cause irnprov+.ments t:o be made tD the e,.isement, I- believe that all affected pro;)erty owners on the east and west sides of the eel senient wou 1 d b. required to dedicate to t:gee City a strip of their I nd for that you rpose,. and m<iy also be rcgo l red tc. fund a portion of that irrprovem!nt. I any oppos-e:d, to and, E,uch dec ication and the resultant loss of trees, yard, fence, and privacy, and the increasci traffic flo", that would result. I believe that tl'e proposed deve- lopment should bra required to seek access tJirourlh recently construc- ted streets located further to the crest. 'ro this effect, I am ;")repr,re.d to oppose. any decllceition and widening efforts, includizig my proportional share of any legal expenses required, sl-ould a group of concerned pr�:ypeerty cowners retain legal ccuunsel . I reel i °ve that through an organized gr•o4ip effort, vie: wl l l be able tc, thwart any at.ttrript: to conM;cat•e: our property, and there- by prevent radicsl changes, to our rural neighborhood. Yvursvery trulys, �Ccirt D. Miller n p. r YY1 C. V Nip j%j��aid' �0 , ,► �r I.. MA Oki ■�■ Rif UP PIT Ri" I-� � �� :� Im Pi ■ moor'. :sou • • ■t��' ��=�t�� ►�4ht �,,a,6t � � •. ., ��' is - . r�.'�•� • ,•. �, •..•,� �� .��'� � �17 ■ COO F up p •• ��` A, if �'f tw-�ta - «i�Q • .r' .S�,�li' � i!s �1: r �s � •ti Al LU 4 1 ♦♦nn flu z MONSOON nr • ,J ► 1p } ` �.j� J ^!t R . �-yr I ' per' W �x,, 1 R� / � �• -r... wRl r*q,M . ... _ � lima d1A1Al70AN ye w _ -- _ w � � -- -'�'M-•• - - --- _ 'f�MM 1 •p .•-N ..�I lI � 3: - ~ ° "• r •o i'_ _ 1 __ _;. ..,� 'r�oT'./. „A.x.y..,0 I _/' 1 1•— — — —0'tW 31 Altld ' I n_I N dw _,.CT, ;e Iy Iw �r 1; f. O ¢ m t m 5�do •!5� � �• . K<.. p,•�J.'Ri /.—iwf'-i--7ct - wM9.7f I it z ell�J �' •4 5 h :'k p ��O �i _ ; �5o• m a l iv aob 4 e{Lo�t 6 5'i63 O S o ¢ m Il1IAYS71W1•awc•�'' W �� •-3111PI 3�NJ.N3H1U1S (V S _• w mi "• m doh• _o/b 4 --"/b .. .f!Ib Is-+ `� -'. o¢w t a-9--11 33 [��y i� ► zr Sz �' t /n4 � t5 � � �' t = -O i i �,� 0 C ; In.1 a' O ; i,p r"-- --�mt _ •___ _■] ------ ------ --------- _` of CAI L..1 ..a.K.J ti ' d ] R L 7 ��'� _ S1.+e.cc. _' */1�� `q _! ''e -_;iO 5f±.x - '3 ; =i * ` z :.._.._.., .. _ __ ._. �.. 0 4IY14L srnt7IRIN1 Gb 6 �06 �ig�/�.d,Q'�� •w� soot -r—, f Cob l 906 9IY1l1 bS3U71,11H 3AIUa S I IIN 3)nf•IH7(IOS ,, < •:r.. -ltd� i cq 5 _ten_ _a.w_ _1.,,_,•. _c��_-- -'''x'- -1'='=- --"="-- --'•=" -- --11=-- -----.-'-�-=_,i"�a 1> e2_ _--car_:_ ^e•�r__ _ .. _ - . _ 7A-5 City of Southlake,Texas CONCEPT PLAN REVIEW SUMMARY r " CASE NO: ZA 94-17 REVIEW NO: THREE DATE OF REVIEW: 03/31/94 PROJECT NAME: Concept Plan for Southlake Hills East. 11.455 acres situated in the James Thornhill Survey, Abstract No. 1505, Tracts IMA, 1A5, 1A7, 1E, and MIA OWNER/APPLICANT: ENGINEER/PLANNER/ARCHITECT: Conn-Anderson, Inc. J. E. Levitt Engineers, Inc. 215 Executive Way, Suite 120 726 Commerce Street, Suite 104 De Soto, Texas 75115 Southlake, Texas 76092 Phone: Phone: (817) 481-3313 Fax: Fax: (817) 481-3315 CITY STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE ABOVE REFERENCED PLANS RECEIVED BY THE CITY ON 03/07/94 AND WE OFFER THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR NEED FURTHER CLARIFICATION, PLEASE CONTACT KAREN GANDY AT (817) 481-5581, EXT. 743. The applicant did not submit new exhibits for the second reading of the rezoning request; however, staff has added the informational comment since the second review summary. 1. Staff recommends Hidden Knoll Court be moved East to align with the existing ingress/egress easement. (See attached exhibit 'A') the purpose of this recommendation is to allow future extension of.a public street into the area currently being served by the private street. This would allow lots to be platted (for title purposes), the property to be subdivided (Lots must front public street.), and would transfer maintenance to the City upon completion of a public street. * Prior to the recording of the final plat, the developer of Southlake Hills East will have to resolve the differences in the alignment of Northridge Drive at the common line of Southlake Hills East and Timber Lake additions and provide a letter of agreement from the developer of Timber Lake. * Denotes Informational Comment cc: Conn-Anderson, Inc. John Levitt Engineers Inc. enc: Exhibit 'A' - Alternative Street Alignment '14-6 • 1 _-�----- --- MEADOW RIDGE CT. I LOT , nrtgr. 71 I I t I.ni . I.nf 1 L111 6 1 u E 11�T 1nfAKE Iles LOT s LOCA,rON MAP ' I — PIT 7 t. r11ASE s i cA aa[/av _.. 1, [ 1 A.HIDE 1J)l 1 � JJ 1 1 1 T. .4....f1•.I .YII fM.I f/l i 1� 1 1 tat a 1 1 1 IAw vI.� MtYen.l. �Yti- 1 I ' 1 I Lot t 1 = '• «..r M 1 I 112r� eLoac IF d 11 I to I ] Ej ' NORTNRIDGE DRIVEORTHR _ L-- - - -..i. In11♦., .:«�i--_ $ RIYFi wN.. LOT s EDT, auT dMI ll® f 4 3 �t �� H19DEIJ (lt-T wesLuwAa"`cxan ,.n.Tm. 5 (., v0.MLILAp,I'QI,T N7 • t Ix LI. I 1 1 1 1 an•Ia I I Iroaw�r.nerain,�n D= 1 G< I 1 Q v1. �1LTEK�aT1�lE STK,E K 5T J. THORNMIL SURVEY, A-1501 CONTINENTAL BLVD. M.M.FREEMAN SURVEY. A-533 1 eEoa�a Lor 1 Eor• PRELIMINARY PLAT OF SOUTHLAKE MILLS CAST •••^•w••�r••w• an atUttton to the CUV of �m,,•,,,•q ep,rlld I r-« SOUTIILAKE .swge m. a svivr ' .e—�.•:•� TARRANT COUNTY. TCl(A9 v1swem _ �� to tow JAXISS T/MR1VR'!LL SdRV6Y —jEiLl .u.o..«.•w•w ae.•«• Abstract l606 rII«malt swan Knee fM fsv.•.tw.••.,Trllw• !6 LOTS •o+. M.I M466 ACRES ......... ��' �". es rcenvaer ns. os.aeoa-w1.nr+t.Ev:�voa. Iwao. •-�• .1 i I r 1tEADOM RIDGE CT. LOT 9 SrTE I I ® LUD.-MED DENSTY RESID LOT LOT 3 LOT 6 LOT 7 -' LDT B I, TNLAKE MILLS ' I IDCA710N YAP r SE1..__ 910E ........_.... PNASE I ... i j I T Tk,]27 CAN ET 910E 13N -I' K u ---- �� g 20A� I � -T-Rv- -- - -.[.r- T 1 i 1 foil LOT aL it 1 I •y 1 I f t i 9 i�T 2 I `�� sr Nur ..Ex� i• r.u''1F S ci 7 .31 KJ.L_ � '! � 1 EE.< r 2 ! J I _ I 1 LOT I ' ••r�r �" ry tl e 1 I Ik + --r----T- I I• BLOCK( D to NORTHRDxE DRIVE --� �•• -— -ra__- •� L___-- I ORTHRIDGE DRIVE LOT a LOT 9 I 1 D' r.r • � ' I L1 I I ILA - OlR`GM002 ._...._.Drawn c DaoM.. D�.DatKw I wn y i 1� I—.- LUA.-MED.DENSITY FEW. ; P.O.B. I 10y I I y w 1 ci li = 600 I >r I ""` I •.G'- I 'k, I I arrEs r.ZwD�a�EY.Tr u. D.Av<�M I Q / 0 O LU.D.-MED.DENSITY RESID. I 3 If 0 1 0 a / ' BLOCK, LU.O.- .DENSITY REDD. i _ ,T,..� ..r ri i agar. LU.0.-MED.DENSTY ITESID. K w.. . I I Y01's.ImLi oa nip K t I I LU.D.-MED.DENSITY RESD. I I aLtoD,a I wa � 1 I tl LU.D.-UED.DENSTY RESID. I I YDL awl re Im: I I Dw_T.cD.rx I 1 � L.LL0.-Y[D.OEMff111E51D. J.YINORNHILL SURVEY A-1501 CONTINENTAL BLVD. Y.M. FREEMAN SURVEY, A-533 1 BLOCK a LOT, Lora CONCEPT PLAN OF SOUTHLAKE HILLS EAST an addition to Me City of .D. sit. mwvv a.mVV1 oyra.r, r.Y SOUTHLAKE TARR�® ANT COUNTY, TEXAS zwawlBaawa, Deoc. o,mlma ruNNm in the JAMES THORNHlLL SURVB'I' AbstTact 1505 rr m.ala aRlm■n[N. J8 Lon 11.I55 ACRBS eras.r. rr M lU1CAf IIYI PMFOSSD S0h7 lT.W-JOA can - rsa tint P". p.D[MO L N-17 CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS ORDINANCE NO. 480-115 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 480, AS AMENDED, THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS; GRANTING A ZONIN CHANGE ON A CERTAIN TRACT OR TRACTS OF LAND WITHIN THE T.Y OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS BEING APPROXIMATELY A 11 .455 AC T CT OF LAND OUT OF THE JAMES THORNHILL SURVEY, ABSTRA NO. 1505, TRACTS 1A3A, 1A5, 1A7, 1E, and 1E1A ,,,-`AND MO FULLY AND COMPLETELY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT "A')r FROM "AG' GRICULTURAL TO "SF- 20A" SINGLE-FAMILY RES DENTIAL DIST CT SUBJECT TO THE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENT CONTAINED I THIS ORDINANCE; CORRECTING THE OFFIC ZONING MAP; PR SERVING ALL OTHER PORTIONS OF THE ZON NG ORDINANCE; DETE INING THAT THE PUBLIC INTEREST, M RALS AND GENERAL WEL ARE DEMAND THE ZONING CHANGES AND AMENDMENTS HEREIN MADE; ROVIDING THAT THIS ORDINANCE S L BE CUMULATIVE OF AL ORDINANCES; PROVIDING A S ILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING R A PENALTY FOR VIOLATIO S HEREOF; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; PROVIDING FO PUBLICATION IN THE OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER; AND PROVIDING EFFECTIVE DATE. ou a e, Texas is a home rule City acting under its Charter adopted by the electorate pursuant to Article XI, Section 5 of the Texas Constitution and Chapter 9 of the Texas Local Government Code; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 211 of the Local Government Code, the City has the authority to adopt a comprehensive zoning ordinance and map regulating the location and use of buildings, other structures and land for business, industrial, residential and other purposes, and to amend said ordinance and map for the purpose of promoting the public health, safety, morals and general welfare, all in accordance with a comprehensive plan; and WHEREAS, the hereinafter described property is currently zoned as "AG" Agricultural under the City' s Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance; and WHEREAS, a change in the zoning classification of said property was requested by a person or corporation having a proprietary interest in said property; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Southlake, Texas, at a public hearing called by the City Council did consider the following factors in making a determination as to whether these changes should be granted or denied: safety of the motoring public and the pedestrians using the facilities in the area immediately surrounding the sites; safety from fire hazards and damages; noise producing elements and glare of the vehicular and stationary lights and effect of such lights on established character of the neighborhood; location, lighting and types of signs and relation of signs to traffic control and adjacent property; street size and adequacy of width for traffic reasonably expected to be generated by the proposed use around the site and in the immediate neighborhood; adequacy of parking as determined by requirements of this ordinance for off-street parking facilities; location of ingress and egress points for parking and off-street loading C:\ORD\ZONING\480.115 - q Page 1 spaces, and protection of public health by surfacing on all parking areas to control dust; effect on the promotion of health ad the general welfare; effect .on light and air; effect on the over- crowding of the land; 'effect on the concentration of population, and effect on transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks and other public facilities; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Southlake, Texas, further considered among other things the character of the districts and their peculiar suitability for particular uses and the view to conserve the value of the buildings, and encourage the most appropriate use of the land throughout this City; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Southlake, Texas, does find that there is a public necessity for the zoning changes, that the public demands them, that the public interest clearly requires the amendments, and that the zoning changes do not unreasonably invade the rights of those who bought or improved property with reference to the classification which existed at the time their original investment was made; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Southlake, Texas, does find that the changes in zoning lessen the congestion in the streets, helps secure safety from fire, panic, and other dangers, promotes the health and the general welfare, provides adequate light and air, prevents the over-crowding of land, avoids undue concentration of population, and facilitates the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks and other public requirements; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Southlake, Texas, has determined that there is a necessity and need for the changes in zoning and has also found and determined that there has been a change in the conditions of the property surrounding and in close proximity to the tract or tracts of land requested for a change since the tractor tracts of land were originally classified and therefore feels that the respective changes in zoning classification for the tract or tracts of land are needed, are called for, and are in the best interest of the public at large, the citizens of the city of Southlake, Texas, and helps promote the general health, safety and welfare of the community. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS: Section 1 . That Ordinance No. 480, the Comprehensive zoning Ordinance of the City of Southlake, Texas, passed on the 19th day of September, 1989, as originally adopted and amended, is hereby amended so that the permitted uses in the hereinafter described areas be altered, changed and amended as shown and described below: Being approximately a 11 .455 acre tract of land out of the James Thornhill Survey, Abstract No. 1505, Tracts 1A3A, 1A5, 1A7, 1E, and 1E1A, and more fully and completely described in Exhibit "A, " attached hereto and incorporated herein. From "AG" Agricultural to "SF-20A" Single-Family. C:\ORD\ZONING\480.115 7A--'O Page 2 Section 2 . That the City Manager is hereby directed to correct the Official Zoning map of the City of Southlake, Texas, to reflect the herein changes in zoning. Section 3 . That in all other respects the use of the tract or tracts of land herein above described shall be subject to all the applicable regulations contained in said Zoning Ordinance and all other applicable and pertinent ordinances for the City of Southlake, Texas . All existing sections, subsections, paragraphs, sentences, words, phrases and definitions of said Zoning Ordinance are not amended hereby, but remain intact and are hereby ratified, verified, and affirmed. Section 4 . That the zoning regulations and districts as herein established have been made in accordance with the comprehensive plan for the purpose of promoting the health, safety, morals and the general welfare of the community. They have been designed, with respect to both present conditions and the conditions reasonably anticipated to exist in the foreseeable future; to lessen congestion in the streets; to provide adequate light and air; to prevent over-crowding of land; to avoid undue concentration of population; and to facilitate the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewerage, drainage and surface water, parks and other commercial needs and development of the community. They have been made after a full and complete hearing with reasonable consideration among other things of the character of the district and its peculiar suitability for the particular uses and with a view of conserving the value of buildings and encouraging the most appropriate use of land throughout the community. Section 5 . That this ordinance shall be cumulative of all other ordinances of the City of Southlake, Texas, affecting zoning and shall not repeal any of the provisions of said ordinances except in those instances where provisions of those ordinances are in direct conflict with the provisions of this ordinance . Section 6 . That the terms and provisions of this ordinance shall be deemed to be severable and that if the validity of the zoning affecting any portion of the tract or tracts of land described herein shall be declared to be invalid, the same shall not affect the validity of the zoning of the balance of said tract or tracts of land described herein. Section 7 . Any person, firm or corporation who violates, disobeys, omits, neglects or refuses to comply with or who resists the enforcement of any of the provisions of this ordinance shall be fined not more than Two Thousand Dollars ($2, 000 . 00) for each offense. Each day that a violation is permitted to exist shall constitute a separate offense . Section 8 . All rights and remedies of the City of Southlake are expressly saved as to any and all violations of the provisions of Ordinance No. 480, as amended, or any other ordinances affecting zoning which have accrued at the time of the effective date of this ordinance; and, as to such accrued violations and all pending litigation, both civil and criminal, whether pending in court or not, under such ordinances, same shall not be affected by this ordinance but may be prosecuted until final C:\ORD\ZONING\480.115 — �I Page 3 A disposition by the courts . Section 9 . The City Secretary of the City of Southlake is hereby directed to publish the proposed ordinance or its caption and penalty together with a notice setting out the time and place for a public hearing thereon at least ten (10) days before the second reading of this ordinance, and if this ordinance provides for the imposition of any penalty, fine or forfeiture for any violation of any of its provisions, then the City Secretary shall additionally publish this ordinance in the official City newspaper one time within ten (10) days after passage of this ordinance, as required by Section 3 . 13 of the Charter of the City of Southlake. Section 10 . This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and publication as required by law, and it is so ordained. PASSED AND APPROVED on the 1st reading the day of 1994 . MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY PASSED AND APPROVED on the 2nd reading the day of 1994 . MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: CITY ATTORNEY DATE : ADOPTED: EFFECTIVE: C:\ORD\ZONING\480.115 1 A _I7- Page 4 EXHIBIT "A" FIELD NOTES 11 . 455 Acres JAMES THORNHILL SURVEY, ABSTRACT 1505 All that certain lot, tract or parcel of land located in the James Thornhill Survey, Abstract 1505, Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas, being all of that certain 5 acre tract conveyed to Margeret H. McClendon by deed recorded in Volume 6591, Page 558, Deed Records, Tarrant County, Texas, all of that certain 3.78 acres conveyed to Denver and Jackie Mills by deed recorded in Volume 7225, Page 841, Deed Records, Tarrant County, Texas and all that certain 2. 685 acres conveyed to Cecil Hancock by deed recorded in Volume 6691, Page 562, Deed Records , Tarrant County, Texas and being more particularly described in one tract as follows : BEGINNING at a 1/2 inch iron pin found for the common Northwest corner of said 2 . 685 Cecil Hancock tract and Southwest corner of aforesaid 5 acre Margeret McClendon tract, said rod also being the Southeast corner of Lot 9 , Block 1 , Southlake Hills Addition, Phase I, according to the plat recorded in Cabinet A, Slide 1327, Plat Records, Tarrant County, Texas and in or near a fence; THENCE departing said 2 . 685 acres along or near a fence and with the common West line of aforesaid Margeret McClendon 5 acres, in the East line of Southlake Hills Addition, Phase I , North 00 degrees 02 minutes 42 seconds West 660-06/100 feet to a 1/2 inch iron pin found in the East line of Lot 3, Block 4, of said Phase I, said rod also being the corr..mon Northwest corner of said McClendon 5 acre tract and Southwest corner of Lot 5, Block 4 , Southlake Hills Addition, Phase II , according to the plat recorded in Cabinet A, Slide 1324 , Plat Records , Tarrant County, Texas; THENCE departing said Phase I and' with the line common to said Phase II and McClendon 5 acre tract, South 89 degrees 23 minutes 16 seconds East, along or near a. fence, passing a 3/8 inch iron pin found for the common Northeast corner of said McClendon 5 acres and Northwest corner of aforesaid 3 .78 acre Mills tract and continuing In all, along or near a fence, 602-35/100 feet to a 1/2 inch iron pin found at the common most northerly Northeast corner of said Mills tract, Southeast corner of Lot 8, Block 4, Southlake Hills Addition, Phase II and in a West line of that certain 240.99 acres conveyed to Southlake Properties Joint Venture, by deed recorded -in Volume 10132, Page 232, Deed Records, Tarrant County, Texas; C:%ORD\ZONING%480.115 Page 5 EXHIBIT "A" THENCE departing said Phase II and with a line common to said 3.78 acre Mills tract and 240.99 acre Southlake Properties Joint Venture tract, along and West of a fence, South 00 degrees 04 minutes 16 seconds East 170-74/100 feet to a 3/8 inch iron pin found for a common ell corner of said 3.78 acre Mills tract and a reentrant corner of said 240.99 acre tract; THENCE North. 89 degrees 09 minutes 57 seconds East along-or near a fence, 57-01/100 feet to a 3/8 inch iron pin found for the common most easterly Northeast corner of 3.78 acre Mills tract and an ell corner of said 240 .99 acre tract and near the approximate common survey line of the James Thornhill Survey, Abstract 1505 and the P. J. Hyde Survey, Abstract 667; THENCE along said approximate survey line and generally with a fence with a line common to 3 .78 acre 14ills tract and 240.99 acre tract, South 00 degrees 12 minutes 26 seconds East 359-30/100 feet to a 1/2 inch iron pin found in the West line of said 240.99 acre tract for the common Southeast corner of said 3.78 acre Mills tract and Northeast corner of that certain 1 acre Quit Claim Deed to Richard E. Osborn as recorded in Volume 9508, Page 333 , Deed Records, Tarrant County, Texas; THENCE departing said survey line and 240.99 acre tract, along or near a fence, and with a line common to said 1 acre Osborn tract and 3.78 acre Mills tract ; North 89 degrees 27 minutes 06 seconds West 332-22/100 feet to a 1/2 inch iron pin found in the East line of aforesaid 5 acre McClendon tract for the common Southwest corner of said 3 .78 acre Mills tract and Northwest corner of 1 acre Osborn tract; THENCE South 00 degrees 28 minutes 56 seconds West with a line common to said Osborn 1 acre and 5 acre McClendon tract and partway with the approximate centerline of a 30 foot ingress and egress easement as recorded in Volume 6193, Page 597, Deed Records, Tarrant County, Texas, in all 130-66/100 feet to a 3/8 inch iron pin found for the common Southwest corner of said Osborn 1 acre and Southeast corner of McClendon 5 acre tract; C:\0RD\Z0NING\480.115 Page 6 EXHIBIT "A" THENCE South 00 degrees 00 minutes 55 seconds East continuin g with said approximate centerline of a 30 foot ingress and egress easement and East line of aforementioned 2 .685 acre Hancock tract and West lines of that certain 2 . 5 acre tract conveyed to James T. Bradley, et ux, by deed recorded in Volume 9149 , Page 430, Deed Records, Tarrant County, Texas and that certain 0.5 acre tract conveyed to William E. Bell by deed recorded in Volume 7761, Page 1653, Deed Records, Tarrant County, Texas, in all 374-81/100 feet to a 3/8 inch iron pin found in the West line of said 0.5 acre Bell tract for the common Southeast corner of said 2 . 685 acre Hancock tract and Northeast corner of a 2. 13 acre tract conveyed to Carrol Lynn Hjorth by deed recorded in Volume 8765 , Page 331, Deed Records, Tarrant County, Texas; THENCE North 76 degrees 59 minutes 12 seconds West with a line common to said 2 . 13 acre Hjorth tract and 2. 685 acre Hancock tract 158-68/100 feet to a 1/2 inch iron pin found at an angle point and continuing with said common line South 79 degrees 19 minutes 32 seconds West 175-03/100 feet to a 1/2 inch iron pin found for the common Southwest corner . of said 2 . 685 acre Hancock tract, Northwest corner of 2 . 13 acre Hjorth tract and in the East line of that certain Tract A, 1 .526 acres, conveyed to Chandler, et ux, et al, by deed recorded in Volume 9985 , Page 893, Deed Records, Tarrant County, Texas and in or near a fence; THENCE along or near a fence and with a line common to said Chandler, et ux, et al tracts A & B and 2 .685 acre Hancock tract, North 00 degrees 04 minutes 42 seconds West 374-57/100 feet to the place of beginning, and containing some 11 .455 acres or 498,968 square feet . 1A -15 C:\ORD\ZONING\480.115 Page 7 AIL KJ z- A n (law April 5. 1994 Honorable City Council City of Southlak:e 667 North Carroll Avenue Southlak:e, Texas 76092 Gentlemen: I have been a resident of Southlak:e for eleven months, and would like t�� take this opportunity to voice my support for the proposed Lonesome Dove Estates subdivision. If the City of Southlak:e continues the growth we are now experiencing, I feel it is very important to attract and use quality homebuilders to continue the lifestyle we now enjoy in the area. The proposed h�mebui 1 ders for Lonesome Dove Estates meet that criteria very well . In addition to the quality product they offer , some of the h7omebuilders are also residents of Southlak:e. They have a vested interest in seeing that their product maintains the high standards required by the City. I also feel that the eight acre park: that will be deeded to the City is a plus for all of Southlak:e. With the rapid growth we are experiencing, park: and recreation areas will be one of the priorities the City must address can a continuing basis. I dope the Council will look: favorably on this proposed subdivision, and give it your final approval . Thank: you for the opportunity of expressing my thoughts can this matter . Sincerely, J-hn R. Van Scan Southview Trail Southlak:e, Texas 76092 817-481-0264 Ms. Karen Gandy City of Southlake Re: ZA 94-14, Lonesome Dove Estates Dear Ms. Gandy: Please accept this letter as formal acknowledgement that I do not oppose the above referenced zoning and platting request. Additional comments, if any: 4 � ��IL� �� )DEC �'l��OC�S Executed this 31 day of March, 1994 B1� 'cL� Lq Y• (print name) Address• 1 ft �• Ms. Karen Gandy City of Southlake Re: zA 94-14 , Lonesome Dove Estates Dear Ms. Gandy: Please accept this letter as formal acknowledgement that I do not oppose the above referenced zoning and platting request. Additional comments, if any: A-D 41 Executed this day of March, 1994 By: A/ � 'S (T-AC (print name) Address: J (40" Ms. Karen Gandy City of Southlake Re: ZA 94-14 , Lonesome Dove Estates Dear Ms. Gandy: Please accept this letter as formal acknowledgement that l do not oppose the above referenced zoning and platting request. Additional comments, if any: ✓ ��.c� •�-x.. �/�'��-tom i`� ��iµ�.�c��-° %��X �re� Executed this day of M ch, 1994 By; 6 (print name) Address: 2, Q 1 ex#e"O-y rAPR 7994Ms. Karen Gandy j City of Southlake Re: ZA 94-14, Lonesome Dove Estates Dear Ms. Gandy: Please accept this letter as formal acknowledgement that I do not oppose the above referenced zoning and platting request. Additional comments, if any: Clit�l p Executed this day of March, 1994 By: (pi7int name) Address: D � Zt " SOURCE tJFW f3VIl..PEf'` '"°`Rc" `��'� PERMITS BY CITY - 1993 City Permits Total SgFt Avg SgFt Total Value Avg Value ADDISON 204 466,195 2,285 24,944,308 121,786 ALLEN 695 1,643,826 2,365 82,358,930 118,502 ARLINGTON 1378 3,131,038 2,272 148,275,933 107,602 BEDFORD 171 382,435 2,236 16,498,387 96,482 BENBROOK 43 94,545 2,199 3,273,998 76,139 BLUE MOUND 6 8,527 1,421 261,800 43,633 CARROLLTON 729 2,181,214 2,992 85,37U12 117,107 CEDAR HILL 361 708,382 1,962 36,411,000 100,861 COLLEYVILLE 264 1,000,718 3,791 61,957,700 234,309 COPPELL 793 2,321,548 2,965 154,221,718 196,963 DALLAS 1083 3,794,543 3,504 182,306,064 169,334 DALWORTH GARDENS 16 59,842 3,740 2,968,600 179,288 DENTON 276 578,200 2,095 33,536,280 121,508 DESOTO 282 634,696 2,251 32,258,574 114,392 DUNCANVILLE 39 79,808 2,046 4,496,675 115,299 EULESS 101 222,163 2,200 9,120,614 90,303 FLOWER MOUND 1383 3,416,147 2,470 133,054,779 96,207 FORT WORTH 1215 2,699,960 2,222 120,056,406 98,812 FRISCO 802 1,754,934 2,188 90,941,967 113,394 GARLAND 667 1,353,000 2,028 70,167,499 105,199 GRAND PRAIRIE 415 907,584 2,187 36,646,150 88,304 GRAPEVINE 445 1,237,297 2,780 53,008,179 119,120 HALTOM CITY 41 53,018 1,293 2,151,000 52,463 HASLET 11 25,279 2,298 919,995 83,636 HIGHLAND PARK 15 51,000 3,400 5,489,000 365,933 HIGHLAND VILLAGE 229 690,643 3,016 41,326,715 180,466 HURST 176 401,759 2,293 16,474,132 93,603 IRVING 544 1,312,359 2,412 79,914,352 146,901 KELLER 295 779,794 2,643 38,440,072 130,305 KENNEDALE 30 61,980 2,066 2,618,419 87AI LAKESIDE 6 16,193 2,697 1,019,000 169,833 LANCASTER 57 99,566 1,747 4,333,992 76,035 LEWISVILLE 365 689,618 1,889 27,698,325 75,858 MANSFIELD 320 765,305 2,392 44,051,573 137,661 MCKINNEY 766 1,819,430 2,375 87,524,763 114,262 MESQUITE 783 1,570,946 2,006 60,110,682 76,770 N RICHLAND HILLS 468 1,111,769 2,376 54,599,857 116,666 PLANO 2649 9,445,925 3,W 403,787,122 152,430 RICHARDSON ISO 492,331 3,282 20,795,803 138,639 RIVER OAKS 2 3,683 1,842 130,000 65,000 ROWLETT 780 1,720,495 2,206 77,756,480 99,688 SACHSE 153 314,045 2,053 15,097,170 98,674 SAGINAW 8 14,325 1791 518,325 64,791 SOUTHLAKE 515 1,841,673 3,576 112,757,50 218,947 UNIVERSITY PARK 17 76,056 4,474 6,913,000 406,647 WATAUGA 75 122,898 1,639 4,949,924 64,666 WHITE SET11 EMENT 1 1,500 1,Sw 60,000 60,000 (kinech 1994 5 Q'op Builders & Subdivisions - Tarrant Co. - 1993 Builders Subdivisions CHOICE HOMES 374 PARK GLEN FORT WORTH 286 CENTEX HOMES 287 FTIMARRON SOUTHLAKE 110 PULTE HOMES 231 TWIN MILLS FORT WORTH 87 WEEKLEY HOMES,DAVID 206 ARLINGTON MEADOWS ARLINGTON 86 PERRY HOMES 188 RIVER FOREST BEDFORD 84 DREES HOMES 131 SUMMERFIELDS FORT WORTH 84 HORTON CUSTOM HOMES,D.R. 130 HERITAGE MANSFIELD 80 HIGHLAND HOMES 129 SOUTHRIDGE LAKES SOUTHIAKE 78 GEHAN HOMES 123 1 STONE LAKES SOUTHLAKE 7g GENERAL HOMES 101 RIVERTRAILS FORT WORTH 77 RYLAND HOMES 87 YORKMEADOW ARLINGTON 76 HAWKINS CONSTRUCTION COMPANY,STEVE 85 ARBOR OF CREEKWOOD MANSFIELD 75 HISTORY MAKER HOMES 77 BELLAIRE PARK NORTH FORT WORTH 74 IRVING HOMES 74 VILLAGES OF FAIRFIELD ARLINGTON 71 A-VENTURE HOMES 60 WHISPERING MEADOWS ARLINGTON 71 CENTENNIAL HOMES 60 LOS PRADOS ARLINGTON 69 VOLKMAN HOMES 60 COVENTRY PLACE N RICHLAND HILLS 65 MARQUISE HOMES,INC. 54 ROSS DOWNS COLLEYVILLE 58 LEGACY HOMES 53 HULEN MEADOW FORT WORTH 55 HERITAGE/PACIFIC AMERICAN HOMES 51 WINDING CREEK GRAPEVINE 55 HOMES,BOB 49 MEADOWCREEK FORT WORTH 53 ONSTRUCTION 45 PARKWOOD KELLER 50 CUSTOM HOMES 45 FUIMBER LAKE SOUTHLAKE 50 U.S.HOMES 45 HUNTER BEND ARLINGTON 49 GULF LAKE CONTRACTING 38 FAIR OAKS N RICHLAND HILLS 45 SANDLIN HOMES,J.B. 36 SUMMERWOOD ARLINGTON 45 CLASSIC CONCEPTS CUSTOM HOMES 34 WINDING CREEK ARLINGTON 45 GIFFIN HOMES 34 CHAPEL CREEK RANCH FORT WORTH 44 STONEWOOD HOMES 34 WALNUT ESTATES MANSFIELD 44 WILSON HOMES,DOYLE 34 QUAIL HOLLOW WATAUGA 43 SANTA FE HOMES 33 PARKER OAKS ARLINGTON 40 CLARK HOMES,MACK,DBA IMPACT HOMES 32 HUNTINGTON VILLAGE FORT WORTH 39 CASA LINDA BUILDERS 30 SHADY OAKS N RICHLAND HILLS 39 TWIN CITIES 30 STEEPLE RIDGE N RICHLAND HILLS 37 DAVIS HOMES,JAY 28 BEAR CREEK BEND EULESS 36 REMBRANDT HOMES 27 VILLAGE PARK FOREST HURST 35 TEXAS BEST CUSTOM HOMES 26 HEATHERWOOD KELLER 34 CUSTOMS UNIQUE INC 25 MILL CREEK COLLEYVILLE 34 WATERFORD PROPERTIES 25 FOSSIL VILLAGE HALTOM CITY 33 ELITE CUSTOM HOMES 24 HIDDEN LAKE GRAPEVINE 33 MYART HOMES 24 SOUTHLAKE HILLS SOUTHLAKE 33 DEGUIRE&COMPANY,D.A. 23 MIRA VISTA FORT WORTH 32 WOOD BEND CORP. 23 RIDGEWOOD BEDFORD 31 CALAIS CUSTOM HOMES 22 WEBB BRITTON ARLINGTON 31 CENTURIAN AMERICAN HOMES 22 OAK HILLS N RICHLAND HILLS MIRA INVESTMENTS 22 SOUTH VIEW SOUTHLAKE f3O MURRAY CUSTOM HOMES,BOB 22 STONYBROOK SOUTH N RICHLAND HILLS 30 SUMEER HOMES 22 SAYBROOKE GRAPEVINE 29 WESILAKE ARLINGTON 29 �wch 1994 7 permit Statistics by City (*joallas/Fort Worth, January 1994 City Permits Total SgFt Avg SgFt Total Value Avg Value ADDISON 8 17,731 2,216 S906,050 S113,256 ALLEN 56 137,994 2,464 7,615,5W 135,991 ARL.INGTON 93 215,311 2,315 10,256,680 110,287 BEDFORD 19 42,706 2,248 2,131,803 112,200 BENBROOK 7 15,636 2,234 547,260 78,180 CARROLLTON 52 156,244 3,005 6,432,230 123,697 CEDAR HILL 36 70,278 1,952 3,561,200 98,922 COLL EYVILLE 21 73,710 3,510 4,782,000 227,714 COPPELL 52 159,617 3,070 10,811,080 207,905 DALLAS 95 294,672 3,102 14,482,605 152,448 DENTON 14 27,250 1,946 1,646,958 117,633 DESOTO 22 49-W 2,253 1,863,288 84,695 DUNCANVILLE 2 4,696 2,343 264,585 132,293 EULESS 17 44,750 2,632 1,850,453 108,850 FLOWER MOUND 115 298,125 2,505 11,224,776 97,607 FORT WORTH 85 195,668 2,184 8,388,471 98,688 FRISCO 72 150,167 2,086 7,129,465 99,020 GARLAND 62 134,367 2,167 5,787,650 93,349 GRAND PRAIRIE 24 48,952 2,040 1,866,3W 77,766 GRAPEVINE 22 63,307 2,878 2,598,476 118,113 HIGHLAND VELL AGE 20 64,569 3,228 4,662,666 233,133 HURST 16 36,976 2,311 1,576,113 98,507 IRVING 47 114,815 2,443 6,749,511 143,607 KELLER 24 69,195 2,883 3,408,000 142,000 KENNEDALE 1 1,902 1,802 100,000 100,000 LAKESIDE 1 2,200 2,200 89,000 89,000 LANCASTER 3 4,510 1,503 195,450 61,817 LEWISVILLE 53 98,640 1,861 4,222,424 79,668 MANSFIELD 21 52,172 2,484 3,097,800 147,514 MCKINNEY 49 121,786 2,495 5,822,622 118,829 MESQUITE 51 98,004 1,922 3,947,631 77,405 N RICHL.AND HILLS 34 78,601 2,312 3,962,065 116,531 PLANO 196 713,907 3,642 32,728,076 166,980 RICHARDSON 11 34,215 3,110 1,534,500 139,500 ROWLETT 61 131,016 2,148 6,743,341 110,547 SACHSE 9 18,958 2,106 831,650 92,406 SAGINAW 5 8,765 1,753 394,425 78,885 SOUTHLAKE 49 183,244 3,740 11,000,900 224,508 WATAUGA 2 2,942 1,471 132-W 66,180 9 ,,,. March 1994 Est Active Builders & Subdivisions hrrant County - 1994 (Thru January) Builders Subdivisions CHOICE HOMES 30 COVINGTON HILL EULESS 15 PERRY HOMES 22 17TIMARRON SOUTHLAKE 14 WEEKLEY HOMES,DAVID 19 HULEN MEADOW FORT WORTH 12 CENTEX HOMES 13 COVENTRY PLACE N RICHLAND HILLS 10 SOVEREIGN HOMES 12 RIVER FOREST BEDFORD 9 DREES HOMES 11 PARK GLEN FORT WORTH 8 PULTE HOMES 11 RTVERTRAILS FORT WORTH 8 HAWKINS CONSTRUCTION COMPANY,STEVE 10 STONE LAKES SOUTHLAKE 7fl GENERAL HOMES 8 ARBOR OF CREEKWOOD MANSFIELD 7 HIGHLAND HOMES 8 BELLAIRE PARK NORTH FORT WORTH 7 MARQUISE HOMES,INC 7 SOUTHRIDGE LAKES SOUTHLAKE 7 A-VENTURE HOMES 6 WINDING CREEK ARLINGTON 7 HORTON CUSTOM HOMES,D.R 6 HERITAGE MANSFIELD 6 IRVING HOMES 6 HUNTER PLACE NORTH ARLINGTON 6 BOBO BUILDER,MICHAEL D. 5 NEWPORT VILLAGE ARLINGTON 6 CLARK HOMES,MACK,DBA IMPACT HOMES 5 PARKER OAKS ARLINGTON 6 HISTORY MAKER HOMES 5 ROSS DOWNS COLLEYVILL.E 6 SANDLIN HOMES,J.B. 5 STONEGLEN AT FOSSIL CREEK FORT WORTH 6 STONEWOOD HOMES 5 SUMMERFIELDS FORT WORTH 6 ''-T.KMAN'S INC. 5 WHISPERING MEADOWS ARLINGTON 6 kN HOMES 4 FANNIN FARM ARLINGTON S N HOMES 4 TWIN MILLS FORT WORTH 5 CONSTRUCTION 4 VILLAGE PARK FOREST HURST 5 HORN&ASSOCIATES,WILLIAM 4 YORKMEADOW ARLINGTON 5 LEGACY HOMES 4 HEATHERWOOD KEILER 4 CANDLEWICK HOMES 3 LINCOLNSHIRE FORT WORTH 4 DAVIS HOMES,JAY 3 LONGWOOD AT ROSS DOWNS COLL.EYVILLE 4 GARREIT CONSTRUCTION,RANDALL W. 3 MIRA VISTA FORT WORTH 4 GUNTER HOMES,WAYNE 3 MYERS MEADOW SOUTHLAKE 4 HERI TAGEJPACIFIC AMERICAN 3 OAK HILLS N RICHLAND HILLS 4 M&J CONSTRUCTION 3 OVERLAND STAGE ARLINGTON 4 MIRA INVESTMENTS 3 SOUTHLAKE HILLS SOUTHLAKE 4 NEWPORT CLASSIC HOMES 3 TRAIL RIDGE BENBROOK 4 PREMIER CUSTOM DESIGN 3 WINDING CREEK GRAPEVINE 4 RYLAND HOMES 3 BRIDLEWOOD N RICHLAND HILLS 3 SUMEER HOMES 3 CHAPEL CREEK RANCH FORT WORTH 3 CROSSING OF COLLEYVILLE COILEYVILLE 3 HIDDEN LAKE GRAPEVINE 3 HIGHPOINT ARLINGTON 3 KELMONT PARK BEDFORD 3 PARKWEST SAGINAW 3 PARKWOOD KELLER 3 QUAIL RIDGE FORT WORTH 3 RIDGEWOOD BEDFORD 3 STONYBROOK SOUTH N RICHLAND HILLS 3 TIMBERLAKE SOUTHLAKE -3 TTVERT'ON OAKS ARLINGTON 3 WALNUT CREEK VALLEY MANSFIELD 3 WOODLAND OAKS N RICHLAND HILLS 3 �wch 1994 25 E S City of Southlake,Texas M E M O R A N D U M March 31, 1994 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Karen P. Gandy, Zoning Administrator SUBJECT: ZA 94-14 Rezoning and Development Plan, Lonesome Dove Estates/ First Reading, Ordinance No. 480-114 REQUESTED ACTION: Rezoning and Development Plan approval of Lonesome Dove Estates, being 82.4 acres situated in the N. E. Thompson Survey, Abstract No. 1563, of which 31.196 acres being recorded as Lonesome Dove Estates, Phase I, in Cabinet 'A' , Slide No. 546, P.R.T.C.T. LOCATION: North of Emerald Estates, East of North Carroll Avenue, South of Burney Lane, and West of Lonesome Dove Avenue OWNER: Mary M. Arnold, Gary Cantrell, Larry D. Parker, Sharon K. Parker, Cindy Atkinson, and Randy A. Parker APPLICANT: Tom M. Matthews, Jr. d/b/a Hat Creek Development CURRENT ZONING: "AG" Agricultural (9.53 acres) and "SF-20A" Single-Family Residential (72.88 acres) REQUESTED ZONING: "R-P.U.D. " Residential Planned Unit Development LAND USE CATEGORY: Medium Density Residential NO. NOTICES SENT: Forty-eight (48) RESPONSES: Written responses within 2001 : (see attached) One (1) in favor and nineteen (19) in opposition Written responses outside 2001 : (see attached) Four (4) in favor and eighty-one (81) in opposition Note letter from Janet Murphy, Chair of the Park and Recreation Board thanking the developer for offering to donate neighborhood parkland in the northern part of the city. P & Z ACTION: February 17, 1994; Approved (6-0) to table ZA 94-14 and continue the Public Hearing to the March 3, 1994 Planning and Zoning meeting. March 3, 1994; Approved (4-1) Motion was made to approve ZA 94-14, subject to the Plan Review Summary dated February 25, 1994 and noting on #6 applicants interpretation is net perimeter R.O.W. with the following modifications to the development regulations: - pg. 1, changing the gross acreage to 82.4 acres - pg. 3, changing maximum density to 1.95 du/acre - pg. 3, changing number of residential lots to 160 - pg. 3, delete next to last paragraph in the "Development Concept" section. - pg. 4, adding masonry fence at rear of lots backing to Burney Lane and adding a wood fence with 47.5' on center masonry column western cedar, board-on-board with decorative cap and metal posts. rh - e � City of Southlake,Texas - pg. 4, changing 7.9-acre public park to 7.976-acre park - pg. 4, deleting portion of last paragraph starting with "Immediate access. . . in the Development Concept section. " - pg. 5, Development Regulations: 1. adding minimum lot size - on Carroll 26,500 sq.ft. 2. adding minimum lot width - on cul-de-sac lots, 85 ft. with 50W of frontage on the curve. 3. adding minimum lot depth - 135 ft. on Burney Lane and Lonesome Dove Ave. except when measured on the cul-de- sac; a minimum lot depth of 169 ft. on Carroll Ave. 4. changing minimum floor area to 2000 sq.ft. 6. adding minimum front yard setback of 45' for lots fronting Carroll Ave. 11. changing maximum residential density to 1.95 du/gross acres - pg. 6, Roadways: last paragraph change "Burney Road" to "Lonesome Dove Avenue. " and that the Development Plan be in conformance with the Preliminary Plat presented tonight. COUNCIL ACTION: March 15, 1994; Approved (4-0) applicant's request to table and continue the Public Hearing until the April 5, 1994 City Council meeting. STAFF COMMENTS: The applicant has met all the review comments of the third Plan Review Summary dated March 11, 1994 with the exception of those items addressed in the attached fourth Plan Review Summary dated March 31, 1994. Note: At the March 15, 1994 City Council meeting there was opposition to the rezoning request of 20% of the land area within 2001 of the site; however, since that time several of those residents who were opposed are now in favor of the request; thereby, eliminating the need for a super-majority vote of the City Council. KPG/gj C:\WPF\MEMO\CASES\CC94-14.pud 4 • l/ IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIII 1111111111111 I I I�1111111111 nn unn rr�rir� •J�� j � y Aar �.�.. boo an En mm Alms, IN I "Elm ... �. ' � �1\I111��W■■jj � 1,_ •:I/1111 ion aElm ru ©• ,ram,.,. u► z ` 'gym F mt _ O�NN .• ' Q A ¢m v o am n Z cn cc� cc > m< •Zcc Ic ¢mu W Z m ao:, G ui > O tom. W _ cc CC m ■RN m ✓�� w 1 FO 1 u N - �i H cod moo^< 'o_ , • " N ` 3::1; u aSi m: ail 1 8 z — / I V Z N i 7 3 Sin o I Y n ¢ r uu i ° > Q Y1 C g • �2 Sol r 0 x T o I < r 3 C�'1 jw I m t r n 3 iO w - I 94 a 0■5 ` - I r � �d • o Z ti Ori ^ I• O ~ ' ^ m e J 1 n\\ agar.-rr Y. in IV OJOJOJOJJO w co cc3JO « I •f � t I t t ) � f N G < O 3 = • Q r U �, • • cc r ■ t m � �Q N CO i < R U OlVd w N c I n I M � t • I t 1 PI � 6� A • E Ci E < 4 0 3 V O O M M O 8 Y < n, < ■ < I E..� 2N Nr� �` <_ ��` �Nn .J u o, I City of Southlake,Texas DEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW SUMMARY CASE NO: ZA 94-14 REVIEW NO: FOUR DATE OF REVIEW: 03/31/94 PROJECT NAME: Development Plan for Lonesome Dove Estates. being 82.4 acres situated in the N. E. Thompson Survey, Abstract No. 1563, of which 31.196 acres being recorded as Lonesome Dove Estates, Phase I OWNER/APPLICANT: ENGINEER/PLANNER/ARCHITECT: Hat Creek Development, Co. J. E. Levitt Engineers, Inc. 5501 Greenbriar Drive 726 Commerce Street, Suite 104 Dallas, Texas 75209 Southlake, Texas 76092 Phone: (214) 987-3223 Phone: (817) 481-3313 Fax: Fax: (817) 481-3315 CITY STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE ABOVE REFERENCED PLANS RECEIVED BY THE CITY ON 03/28/94 AND WE OFFER THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR NEED FURTHER CLARIFICATION, PLEASE CONTACT KAREN GANDY AT (817) 481-5581, EXT. 743. ------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------ 1. Add zoning and/or land use designations to the following properties: Dove Estates, L.U.D. = Medium Density Residential Hudson Bay Estates, "SF-lA" Ricket, "AG," L.U.D. = Low Density Residential F.L. Cates, "AG," L.U.D. = Low Density Residential Cox, "AG," L.U.D. = Low Density Residential Quail Creek Estates, "SF-lA" 2. Correct the city limit lines for Southlake and Grapevine. 3. The zoning ordinance requires that a common open space be dedicated which comprises "not less than ten percent (10%)of the total area devoted to the residential use." (Section 30.10). Previous planned unit developments have provided this based on "gross" acreage. This developer proposes netting out the perimeter R.O.W. prior to the calculation. The 7.976-acre park does not meet the gross acreage requirement. Staff does not have a problem with the interpretation proposed (i.e. 10% of residential use area onlv). 4. Correct the rear dimension of Lots 4 and 10, Block 2. * The following comments pertain to the submitted Development Regulations: 5. There are several direction errors on Page 2. ?A -5 1 , City of Southlake,Texas 6. On Page 3, modify paragraph under "Proposed Site Zoning" to conform with Ordinance No. 480- M. Thert, are other references as well. (Please call for clarification.) 7. In the first paragraph on Page 4, correct the minimum lot size along Carroll Avenue to 26,500 square feet to agree with the Development Regulations on Page 5. 8. On the top of Page 5, delete the last sentence and add the following sentence: "Finally, any accessory use shall be permitted in accordance with Ordinance No. 480, Section 34.1 for the least restrictive single family zoning district at the time the residential P.U.D. is approved." 9. Correct the spelling of Road in the first paragraph under Roadways on Page 6 and change "Final Site Plan" to "Final Plat" in the second paragraph of this section. 10. Correct zoning district labels on Page 7 to read: "...from "AG" agricultural and "SF-20A" residential to "R-P.U.D." Residential Planned Unit Development District ..." * Although not required by ordinance, staff would appreciate placing "Case No. 94-14" in the lower right comer for ease of reference. * The applicant should be aware that any revisions made prior to City Council must be received at the City by April 11. 1994. All revised submittals should be folded 6" x 9" and include an 11" x 17" reduction. * Denotes Informational Comment cc: Gary Cantrell, 2319 Hall Johnson Rd. Suite B, Colleyville, 76034 Mary M. Arnold, 3404 Southill, Austin, 78703 M/M Larry Parker, Ms. Cindy Atkinson, Randy Parker, 2605 N. Carroll Ave, Southlake, 76092 ?A-Le 1111141 141ttri`is {��11 Tf t,l ,tl !,� lsi!Ii la a 4 �i l+L�Ai �./}j��??�!Tip ,1�=) 1:t i!!=s I � • z e)m a iJ�IF�+ '�1,��!� ,a I =ill 11s _!+ 11i w Ew-, S a o lI �f j�+ 1j i rill�!!}Estjj�t `�. s V7' o ie. ■ a Y a ! t}j'= 1 pi l� Yt+• �� s 6+! {�' j �'# 11 ,i!I•�Stl!�P, I.' su •}! } 11 jTj!t i!1'ti !1}�i) Tfi•ri >ii}N mill� a M, - t jim r t �+t j �1!!11! mwv �••••• tarn a+oan arson E E M:sal s i e L Z 31010 A 0 w aa•r �` ; tp Wid wam>r A Ai i ; o g I P I Y 5' I ` ~' r✓ i • } 7.OL,�,pp S .. ygIlk I ! ssaYa sn.nr ( i I 1 a•a. - 1 � ..1 r •\'�, o = •, 1 1 I� �� 1 • _ n 1jJ� •�" ' = 1 I '� e�; , � ..y., �`O' A \.• �'. � ''� -sue` � :1 b r . a a o,is •$'. r N L_ IY ..,a. IY�I_ MM I.YI A � 1 N ••1 � - .. �_---- �.16)-i{9AAF �—t�9a110i-- '•� ��a ! `93�a'i �` i 1• a ♦ 0 0 ^ ' +I i x �x i a Ho01a y + I Igo 1 _ min s v.rY��. ■ '°°>r ��1=� !7 A�hr nava,)' M))Ye none 3 a lA=WIA AfAa1W'1 ti11f ``��/ '00 IMMOMA3a 1VH ,ow ! e E NHVd 3AOa mosm01 "�•�"10°a� � •°� wo�� aiufi�t c�it �v N t0 � � 1 1 LL CD AUGUSTUS CT. z V- Z Z N CC 00 0 Z i NLu CO w a a -- -- I W O w1 as w cr Lu � 1 �. Lij cc > w ° ® O Q ., W � O 1 0 w .� LV 1•- Z } 01 W m Y y: O to �I W � ..' J Z n.m oWC 41 Q o = r a d� Oz� O O D U 1=-Q N ° J O 1-- co ° CAW "D � a w 1 W cd cc Z ® Z cc = 1 O 1— 1— Z � 1 7777-1 1 1 �.. "t. ]� 1N3Wd0'13A3a �33dO 1VH ;m ! NUVd 3AOa 3WOS3NOl `°`''`°1O""``xv 111 Eum alauae�d puQ s�aa�tyaly 101 aal 'calv{aossy �P �48�A 'f 'K — dvou 3A0a awon i ♦WOf10�M1W10�p AM - ; ® , 100 ----- ~��-- -- i z w s . 10 .. r-__--- •—__ - w R ��.- - • _ . . � "-tom ----- ----- o wausrus T. ' • n� _ I W - w " _ �• 8i 0, Z ; PHASE I _ �� - e:� ®. • I • 54 o 1 • -1D 13XHW4 ; • • • ' �-- I LONESOME DOVE ESTATES DEVELOPMENT REGULATION MARCH 1, 1994 A Planned Unit Development District ("PUD") Residential Community Southlake, Texas This proposal is made by Tom M. Matthews, Jr. and Hat Creek Development Company on behalf of the current property owners described herein requesting the property be rezoned from SF-20 and Agriculture to a Planned Unit Development to be known as Lonesome Dove Estates. The 82.4 acre project will be improved as a single family residential community with a public neighborhood park. The master plan has been designed to create a neighborhood community which affords the benefits to North Carroll Avenue area of Southlake of a neighborhood park while concurrently providing transitional zoning between the surrounding zoning and uses while also alleviating the current storm water drainage problem to the south in the Emerald Estates subdivision. This presentation to the City of Southlake will document and provide information in three areas: 1. Review of the existing site with its current ownership, uses, natural features, etc. , and review of surrounding conditions such as, adjacent zoning, land uses, perimeter streets, etc. ; 2 . Description of the proposed development concept for the requested PUD including land use and the integration with the surrounding uses, density, development standards and requirements, mandatory home owners association, sidewalk system and park facility; 3 . Detailed description and evaluation of on-site and off- site development improvements including paving, storm water drainage, water and sewer facilities and the benefits of the integration of each into the surrounding properties and general area. PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION The Lonesome Dove Estates subdivision will be located on the south side of Burney Lane, bounded on the west by North Carroll Avenue, on the east by Lonesome Dove Avenue and the city of Grapevine, and on the south by the Emerald Estates subdivision. The property is square in shape with a small cut-out at the southeast corner of the property adjacent to the cemetery of the Lonesome Dove Baptist Church. The property is, for the most part, unimproved except for two (2) Case No. 94-14 Lonesome Dove Estates page 1 ?A - I b existing residential structures and their associated structures (garages,etc. ) . The general area of Lonesome Dove Estates is primarily improved with single family residential developments except that area abutting the Lonesome Dove property to the east, in the city of Grapevine, which has a wide variety of commercial uses. To the north of Lonesome Dove Estates is the neighborhood of Dove Estates with a minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet. To the east and northeast are the subdivisions of Quail Creek Estates, a one acre lot size development and the large lot subdivision of Harbor Oaks. Bordering Lonesome Dove Estates on the south is the one acre lot size development of Emerald Estates, and the Lonesome Dove Baptist Church. Off the southwest corner of the Lonesome Dove Estates property, and across Carroll Avenue is the Carroll Middle School and the Carroll Independent School District football stadium. The property is on a ridge with a gentle slope from the center of the property primarily towards the northwest corner and to the south. The property has a sporadic covering of mesquite trees with a more dense stand of large oak trees at the southeast corner of the property. The southern section of the property and the property now developed as Emerald Estates is very flat in character. This lack of topography has caused a problem of poor surface drainage for the existing development, a problem, which will be addressed and capitalized upon with the development of Lonesome Dove Estates. The different land uses and zoning of the surrounding properties have been taken into consideration in the creation of a master plan and preliminary plat for Lonesome Dove Estates so as to cause a suitable and appropriate transition between all of the different properties while creating an attractive and marketable residential community. OWNERSHIP The respective properties are currently owned by the following parties: Ten acres at the southeast corner of Burney Lane and Carroll Avenue is owned by Lonesome Dove Joint Venture; Nine and one half acres located immediately south of the above noted property is owned by Larry Parker, Randy Parker and Cindy Atkinson; The balance of the property, approximately 60 gross acres, is owned by Mary Miller Arnold of Austin, Texas. Case No. 94-14 Lonesome Dove Estates page 2 So - 1i Approximately 2 .5 acres of the property currently owned by Larry and Randy Parker and Cindy Atkinson will remain in their ownership but the property will be platted as part of the Lonesome Dove Estates subdivision. The two (2) lots created from this 2.5 acres of land will be in compliance with the Lonesome Dove Estates PUD Development Regulations as discussed further herein. The balance of the property, approximately 77.0 acres, will be developed in a single coordinated effort by Tom M. Matthews, Jr. and Hat Creek Development Company. PROPOSED SITE ZONING AND LAND USE The proposed zoning of Lonesome Dove Estates is a Planned Unit Development District ("PUD") according to Section 30 of the city of Southlake's Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance Number 480-M, dated September 19, 1989, and in further compliance with subsection 30.7, item 2b, requiring submittal of a Development Concept Plan for the entire Planned Unit Development. Concurrently with this submittal we are applying for approval of the Development Site Plan for Phase One of Lonesome Dove Estates. Development Site Plans for future phases will be submitted for approval prior to the actual development of those phases. The proposed land use for Lonesome Dove Estates is for single family, detached residential units with a maximum density of 1.84 units per acre or approximately 152 residential lots. DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT The goal of the Lonesome Dove Estates development is to have a quality, family oriented residential community offering a peaceful environment while affording the convenience and enjoyment of a public park to its residents and neighbors. Primary access to the subdivision will be located off Carroll Avenue, directly across from and mirroring the entrance to Quail Creek Estates. This location has been made possible by combining the different property ownerships into a single development effort. The primary benefit to this location is the reduced number of ingress and egress points to and from Carroll Avenue. An additional entrance into the community will be constructed on Lonesome Dove Road in a future phase of development. Internally, the streets are curvilinear in nature with numerous cul de sacs which provides a more pleasing visual streetscape while also discouraging cars from traveling at excessive speeds. The Detailed Site Plan presented with this proposal calls for an overall configuration and lot plan to compliment the surrounding Case No. 94-14 Lonesome Dove Estates page 3 zoning and uses. SpOcifically, the lots backing to Lonesome Dove Road and Burney Lane are generally deeper and wider than the standard lot depth in the community. This added depth serves as an additional buffer for those lots within the community backing to these particular streets. With these larger lots, it is the intention of the plan to not cause the perimeter of the property to be developed with smaller or less expensive houses than those houses found on the interior of the subdivision as is often the case in the ultimate build-out of other residential developments. To enhance the transition and compliment the existing improvements, the Detailed Site Plan also calls for those lots along Carroll Road to front Carroll as do those lots to the south and on the west side of Carroll Road. For the most part, the property lines of those lots within Lonesome Dove Estates fronting Carroll Road, line up with those lots across Carroll. These lots are also a minimum of 26,000 square feet (ie. The size of these lots are larger than the currently approved R-20 zoning) . A six (6) foot masonry fence will be constructed on the perimeter of the property along Burney Lane. Additionally, along the perimeter of the property on Lonesome Dove Road, the project will have a six foot wood fence with brick columns 47.5 feet on- center, with board on board inserts of cedar wood pickets and metal posts and a decorative wood cap. On the south boundary of the property, adjacent to Emerald Estates, a 7.976 acre public neighborhood park has been planned whose improvement will be completed simultaneous with the first phase of development. To divert the flow of storm water into Emerald Estates from Lonesome Dove Estates which will alleviate some of the current drainage problems experienced by the residents of Emerald Estates, a storm water detention system will be constructed within this park. By incorporating this detention area in the park, a rigid holding area for storm water is not needed. Rather, the park will have a much wider detention area which can then be used as open, grass covered play areas except during those times immediately following prolonged and/or excessive rainfall. The park will be improved according to the guidelines set forth by the Southlake Park Plan. Access and use of the park will be open to the public. As Emerald Estates is the only residential property not separated from Lonesome Dove Estates by a public roadway, the park affords a transition from Emerald Estates into the new residential development while maintaining the current open area adjacent to those lots on the north side of Emerald Estates. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Except for the public neighborhood park, all of the property Case No. 94-14 Lonesome Dove Estates page 4 SP-12 within Lonesome Dove Estates will be used for a single family detached residential development. All lots within the community will be improved with sidewalks which will then be integrated into the park. Utility distribution facilities, temporary buildings and associated facilities for construction purposes and temporary real estate sales offices shall be permitted under the requested PUD. Special exception uses as approved by the City of Southlake Board of Adjustment as authorized under Section 44.12 of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance shall also be included in the PUD. Finally, any use accessory to an approved special exception use shall be permitted without specific approval if it complies within the conditions for an accessory use. DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS The following development regulations shall be applicable within Lonesome Dove Estates: 1. Minimum Lot Size - 12 , 350 square feet except 26,500 square feet on Carroll Road. There shall be a maximum of fifteen percent (15%) of the minimum size lot. 2 . Minimum Lot Width - Ninety-five (95) feet, except eighty-five (85) feet as measured on the curve of the building line where over fifty percent (50%) of the lot is on the curve of a cul-de-sac. 3 . Minimum Lot Depth - One hundred twenty (120) feet, except one hundred thirty-five (135) feet for those lots which back up to Burney Lane or Lonesome Dove Road except where those lots have over fifty percent (50%) of their frontage on the curve of a cul-de-sac, in which case the minimum one hundred twenty (120) foot depth shall prevail. 4. Minimum Floor Area - Two thousand one hundred (2,100) square feet. 5. Maximum Height - 2-1/2 stories or thirty-five (35) feet. 6. Minimum Front Yard - Twenty-five (25) feet, except forty-five (45) feet for lots fronting on Carroll Road. 7. Minimum Rear Yard - Twenty (20) feet. 8. Minimum Side Yard - Ten (10) feet. 9. Side Yard Adjacent to a Street - Twenty (20) feet. 10. Maximum Lot Coverage - Thirty-five percent (35%) . Case No. 94-14 Lonesome Dove Estates page 5 � h —I �;s 11. Maximum Residential Density - 1.84 units per gross acre. Pursuant to the city of Southlake zoning ordinance for a Planned Unit Development, ten percent (10%) of the area to be used for residential uses, will be set aside and improved as a public neighborhood park. HOME OWNERS ASSOCIATION A home owners association will be established and be in place from the outset of the development whereby all homeowners will be mandatory members of the association. The responsibilities of the association will be to maintain all community owned common areas and to enforce the Lonesome Dove Estates' deed restrictions in order to maintain the quality, character and values of Lonesome Dove Estates. ENGINEERING ANALYSIS Roadways As previously discussed, the proposed Lonesome Dove Estates is bounded by three existing roadways. The roadways include N. Carroll Avenue, Burney Road and Lonesome Dove Toad. These streets are two-lane asphalt roadways. The City has recently upgraded N. Carroll Ave. The proposed roadway alignment for Lonesome Dove Estates as shown on the Development Concept Plan contained in Plate 1 is conceptual in nature and subject to modification based on the Final Site Plan presented to the City of Southlake. As currently planned, there are to be two ingress/egress locations into the subdivision; on North Carroll Avenue and one on Lonesome Dove Road. Drainage Lonesome Dove Estates is situated on a ridge in the Denton Creek (Lake Grapevine) drainage basin. The majority of the acreage flows to the south into Emerald Estates. A detention area will be a integral part of the drainage improvements. As previously proposed and reviewed by the city's consulting engineers, the storm water discharge is taken to the east of Emerald Estates by a 30" RCP and discharged into a tributary of Dove Creek through a culvert running beneath Lonesome Dove Road which further discharges into Dove Creek. All streets and drainage systems will be designed in accordance with the City of Southlake subdivision criteria. Case No. 94-14 Lonesome Dove Estates page 6 I�N - 14 Water Distribution System Lonesome Dove Estates will be served by an existing 8" water line located in N. Carroll Ave. and Burney Road. Following discussions with city staff, it was agreed that the design of the on-site water distribution system for the entire project would include a connection to an existing 6" water line in Emerald Estates. This connection would provide an additional supply point to areas north of Lonesome Dove Estates. Sewage Collection System Sanitary sewer service will be provided by two proposed lift stations within the project. Both lift stations will pump to the existing lift station at the Carroll I.S.D. Middle School. A third pump with capacity of 150 GPM will be added to the existing Carroll I.S.D. Middle School lift station as recommended by the city's consulting engineers. In an effort to rectify the existing septic problems in Emerald Estates, with this development plan, Hat Creek Development Company is prepared to locate its most southern lift station at the south side of Emerald Estates which actual location will be determined in conjunction with city staff and the residents of Emerald Estates. (Refer to letter dated March 23 , 1994 from John E. Levitt to Robert Whitehead, Director of Public Works. ) All design efforts will be closely coordinated with the city of Southlake engineering staff, as well as the city's consulting engineers. SUMMARY The proposed community of Lonesome Dove Estates is designed and will be developed as family oriented single family residential community with ample consideration given to the surrounding zoning and uses so as to be a positive and homogeneous addition to this area of Southlake. I respectfully request the City of Southlake Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council consider and approve a change in zoning from "AG" agricultural and "SF-A" residential to "PUD" Planned Unit Development District pursuant to the criteria presented and discussed herein. Case No. 94-14 Lonesome Dove Estates page 7 �k IS nn nr 3 Ms. Karen Gandy MAR 3 ,0 1994 City of Southlake ILbUDL_W_TL.U=/ Re: ZA 94-14, Lonesome Dove Estates Dear Ms. Gandy: Please accept this letter as formal acknowledgement that I do not oppose the above referenced zoning and platting request. Additional comments, if any: ��3 c 24- dZ�F_b(t_�-?� o e F Co c S� 7WaW 2 ) da seu FT l yr - Executed this � day of March, 1994 By: C. �� (print name) Address• S [L, i Ms. Karen Gandy City of Southlake Re: ZA 94_14, Lonesome Dove Estates Dear Ms. Gandy: Please accept this letter as formal acknowledgement that I do not oppose the above referenced zoning and platting request. Additional comments, if any: s� Executed this a Q day of March, 1994 By: \ L7C Q, (print name) (� Address: t 3 t; MARCH 3 0, 1994 MS.KAREN GANDY CITY OF SOUTHLAKE RE: HAT CREEK DEVELOPMENT JOHN LE=,DEVELOPER DEAR MS.GANDY, I WOULD LIKE TO FORMALLY REMOVE MY NAME FROM THE E30MWG PETITION. THE DEVELOPER IS BEING VERY REASONABLE TO THE E30MWG AREA RESIDENTS. IT IS NOW MY UNDERSTANDING FROM SPEAKING WITH HIM,THAT THE PROPOSED HOMESITES WILL BE AM[N MUM OF 2100 SQUARE FEET ON AMA3 MfUM OF 152 LOTS, THIS PROJECT CAN ONLY ENHANCE THE.VALUE OF PROPERTY OF MUSTlNG HOME OWNERS. THE DRAINAGE ISSUE STILL NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED AND RESOLVED,BUT I bTEEL THE DEVELOPER IS MORE THAN WILLING TO SATISFY THIS CONCERN. RESPECTFULLY, MARILYN GOKEY ADDRESS: 2999 LAKE DRIVE SOUTHLAKE, TX 76092 GARY CANTRELL J Ij MARY ARNOLD IL.__ I I I I I L.D. PARKER I I Inc. 3208 208 S.S. Main Pro'. No. 6107E Ft. Worth, Texas SCALE 1"=300' OWNERSHIP SHEET NO. EXHIBIT MAP DWN: JWB PROPOSED A 1 DATE: 3-3-94 LONESOME DOVE EST. ^ . . ` . -3/.3/�� <� OPPOSITION WITHIN 200' AREA INDICATED WITH AN 11 * ~ � February 21 , 1994 City of Southlake We, the undersigned, citizens of Southlake, Texas hereby petition our city government to stand with us in opposition to the proposed plan known as Lonesome Dove Estates ZA 94-14, creating residential lots less than 1/2 acre in size. 1106,ell Itoo . � ' - re-harnkcuOf � |2- � 8 ^ - & February 21 , 1994 City of Southlake We, the undersigned , citizens of Southlake, Texas hereby petition our city government to stand with us in opposition to the d some Dove Estates ZA 94-14, than 1/2 acre in size. _ J^ ' ' ' S0 l | ^ . February 21 , 1994 . City of Southlake We the undersigned , citizens of Southlake, Texas hereby ' petition our city government to stand with us in opposition to the proposed plan known as Lonesome Dove Estates ZA 94-14, creating residential lots less than 1/2 acre in size. As L CA allzl 60.1 A" ' -_- ^ ^ - , February 21 , 1994 City of Southlake We, the undersigned , citizens of Southlake, Texas hereby petition our city government to stand with us in opposition to the proposed plan known as Lonesome Dove Estates ZA 94-14, re h 1/2 acre in size. Q74-1 CL �7 NIA . | ~ ^ | 74w1z `- .�~��// ~~ ' coast 1\ UQ MATRIMONY-/& )& / ^ . ' ~ February 21 , 1994 City of Southlake We, the undersigned , citizens of Southlake, Texas hereby petition our city government to stand with us in opposition to the proposed plan known as Lonesome Dove Estates ZA 94-14, creating residential lots less than 1/2 acre in size. IvTef veep 51 irne [,CAI Sce AN Ld Cw 'Jd �H -ml ^ � February 21 , 1994 City of Southlake We, the undersigned , citizens of Gouthlake, Texas hereby petition our city government to stand with us in opposition to the proposed plan known as Lonesome Dove Estates ZA 94-14, creating than 1/2 acre in size. ~ � 9 V5 CI � 7 ' |� / `> 7 / 72- �y 14 � ^ ' As ^ . ' , February 21 , 1994 City of Southlake We, the undersigned , citizens of Southlake, Texas hereby petition our city government to stand with us in opposition to the proposed plan known as Lonesome Dove Estates ZA 94-14, creating residential lots less than 1/2 acre in size. 66 75 7� 17 \ ��/�Qw || '�� . . - ~ February 21 , 1994 City of Southlake We, the undersigned , citizens of Southlake, Texas hereby petition our city government to stand with us in opposition to ! | the proposed plan known as Lonesome Dove Estates ZA 94-14, id ti l lots less than 1/2 acre in size. creating -- _ -- 7c ^ m, �f� ~ . . - February 21 , 1994 City of Southlake | We, the undersigned , citizens of Southlake, Texas hereby petition our city government to stand with us in opposition to the proposed plan known as Lonesome Dove Estates ZA 94-14, creating residential lots less than 1/2 acre in size. :�A�.-., -, W-'( Orl �� 1p; February 21 , 1994 City of Southlake We, the undersigned , citizens of Southlake, Texas hereby petition our city government to stand with us in opposition to the proposed plan known as Lonesome Dove Estates "LA 94-14, :cZreat *ng resident * 1 lots less than 1/2 acre in size. . .......... .... ....................... Law rf ....................... ------------------........ ------------- ............. City of Southlake* March 2, 1994 - Mayor: Gary Fickes Mr. Tom Matthews t Mayor Fame em. Oak Tree Financial Corporation -' J Jerry 5646 Milton, Suite 421 - Councilmembers: Dallas, Texas 75206 Barry K.Emerson W.Ralph Evans Stephen W.Apple Sr. Jon Michael Franks Andrew L.Wambsganss Dear Mr. Matthews: City Manager: Curtis E.Hawk Thank you for the presentation you made to the Southlake Park and Recreation Board on February 7, 1994 regarding plans for park development within the City secretary.Sandra L.LeGrand proposed Lonesome Dove Estates subdivision. As you know, your proposal for an eight acre neighborhood park within the subdivision was well received by the Park Board, and we are anxious to work with you on its development. The Southlake Parks, Recreation and Open Space Master Plan calls for a neighborhood park, as well as a joint use facility in the zone in which your proposed subdivision is located. The development of a public park in your proposed subdivision will assist us in meeting the open space requirements for the north western portion of our city. Donation of this park to the City will reduce the need for the City to purchase and improve land in that area. On behalf of the Park Board, thank you for working with us to provide recreational opportunities for the citizens of Southlake. Sincerely, r\W%X- 'M\J-k Janet Murphy, Chair Southlake Park and Recreation Board r� J VA 667 North Carroll Avenue • Southiake, Texas 76092 (817) 481-5581 • FAX (817) 481-0036 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER" • , ' i t'hi Zoo' Area I ` MAR 0 31994 } �' ✓�-t'evrL(..� .�-C,(-(i2/�GCl� C',%7 G�/j7 '' ./�-�,tiC.�.cJ �....�.t-' t'`.c,"!�.i�i)2i2 , _/_ ; .C�zc/v 'rul,n., ��'nC+c%7`�y 5• 2 e� --f2tiAz %2c'' `J / w •-�4c cl G ,///Y/7A/h�f///{.te,a,�'--� �,C'�W�t;LW(�� - Clo V L' cwo�// dr,�,-Aj /'I,- /A211, 4LOZ JA LO� �V/ G n UCL& Jay off- "` ° olb g-4� >IL gA-32 a `04 , N. �arroi{ Ave, ou+sidc Zoo Area, R 3 199.1 I 0 March 3, 1994 Ms. Karen Gandy Zoning Administrator City Of Southlak:e 667 N. Carroll Avenue Southlak:e, Texas 76092 Re: Lonesome Dove Custom Home Development Dear Ms. randy: We purchased land and built a new home in Southl ak:e ten months age , and are very pleased with our community. We have learned that the Lonesome Dave Custom Home Development has been proposed and is being considered by the Zoning and Planning Commission. As a satisfied homeowner in Scguth1ak:e, we would like to voice our support for this proposal . We understand that the proposal is for a Residential Planned Unit Development and will include an eight acre park: area. As Southlak:e continues to grow, we feel it is important to use quality developers and builders. The principals of this proposed development , Mr . h:osse Mayk:us and Mr . Bob Kres>l er , fit that description very well . Beth have their homes in Southlak:e and are aware of the need for proper planning and development . As Southlak:e grows, it will become increasingly important to balance the tag: base with properly planned commercial areas, but quality home development is necessary first in order to attract these commercial -entities. Therefore, we would like to add our wholehearted support to this proposal and ask: that the Zoning and Planning Commission give it serious consideration and approval . Sincerely, c&hn and Marilyn Van Sc n l V 75 S��uthvi ew Trail Southlak:e, Texas 76092 481-i 264 �J gA_3 0of-50e ZOO, 0A Zodiac Pools 0319 855 Davis Blvd. Ste. A f �� Southlake, Tx. 76092 City Of Southlake 667 N. Carroll Ave. Southlake, Tx. 76092 Dear Ms . Gandy: I live in Southlake and I also own a business in Southlake. I am very aware of the new Sub-Division that Bob Kressler & Kosse Maycus will be developing on Carroll Rd. Lonesome Dove Estates will be a very elegant addition to our community. I think it is very kind of them to put in a Community Park. I Live across the road from this new develpment and would love to see it go in. I have two children and there is no place for them to go play. I think that this would be an asset to our Community. We should have more builders that live in our Community and care about it as these two do. Yours incerely, Terry R. Hess a� �p /.� �,,.1� Oat ��P �iJ� /uufG /1l�c ,P.c✓=MA R 6 3 'l 9:9 4 1, ZG4 Jo/ �t Lie C4,u t✓. /Z�vr�f� ��,,r/�—Ls-fo �2f (-�P Zeo/�� "2,7 -4 3 C7j: $k -3s tr. L L �ft 3,o bu+sidC "Zoo' Arca ,.0 O. nr MAR 0 31994 J March 2, 1994 To: Ms. Karen Gandy Planning & Zoning Re: N. Carroll Custom Home Development We understand that there is a proposed custom development in the works for the north section of Southlake. As new residents to the city, we are very much in favor of having such a great addition. We have small children and it would be wonderful to walk down the street for a visit to a clean and beautiful city park with the surroundings of quality built custom homes. We realize that the lots would be slightly smaller than the surrounding properties but, in exchange the City would receive a neighborhood park for all to enjoy. The growth of Southlake is inevitable and it would benefit everyone to have a jump start on good quality living while we have the opportunity. We have seen the proposed plan and our city would have the advantage of choosing beautiful custom homes in the north section rather than the abundance of track homes taking over the south section. We support this plan for development and hope that the board takes this into consideration in making your decision on this matter. Sincerely, l � Bobby and Lisa Rawls 165 E. Dove St. #329-5486 g�-3� LD I LP on Il W ► A jXy lDrL_ ST j 1994AN 0 7 Z Oct F Th'e following form may be filled out and mailed Southlake Planning and Zoning Commission, 667 North Carroll Avenue, Southlake, Texas 76092 . REFERENCE NO. : ZA 94-14 I am (in favor of) (opposed to) (undecided about) the request for the f llow'ng reaso I _ 40 J.S,—e 92 19W-Le. .X,�J-GO,,r`�/,aA LdW*,et'/, SIGNATURE: �2�0-ece ADDRESS : I &qA zm. OtVWA q YL �,`ML 40 aw a Lu LL U'1 LVL+ V•vv '—Lvv VIMas ALI- vI au I LaLL aLV. u1 IYUL Iuuu 1 . UL a The following form may be filled out and mailed to the City of Southlake Planning and Zoning COMM.' 451 iQor£h rrc].1 Avenue, Southlake, Texas 76092 . REFERENCE NO. : ZA 94� ! I Lj T am (in favor of) (opposed to) la�ut}' " a request for the following reago WE NEED TO TAKE A STAND Now FOR THE SAKE" OF OUR SMAI I TOWN _- APPEAL! ! ! SCHOOLS, TAXES, CRIME AND AU _- HOW D RE A MAJOR CONCERN FOR THIS AREA111 WE- SHOULD NOT BE SO QUICK A TURN THIS TOWN INTO JUST ANOTHER CITY! M! SIGNATURE: ADDRESS: Ge - Zoo FT l��C,IC- - [,o T 1 ( - ii,, very truiv yours, ziclk-e' i Planning and Zoning Commission LbyO $vfr1C� �0�5 z+3 Nu�fCktks City of Southlake, Texas ILO,o-D o ra�«.w ..� I ry R-GL .yam .,.�" v 3.) �ft&juC I,-(�D r r The followingform air be f; 11 } rm m� _ ed out and mailed to the Southlake Planning and Zoning Commission, 667 North Ca Southlake, Texas 76092 . IN REFERENCE NO. ZA 94-15 FM1994 I am (in favor of) o osed to P (undecided about for the following reasons : Request ZA 94-15 is inconsistent with the surrounding neid2borhoods and is in di emit conflict with the o i e of the area, Phase 1 of the request, with the exception of one lot, is across from Burney Place to the North (hail CrPPk Estates to the [7Pgt n to the South. Emerald Estates, which consist of 1 plus acre lots. Th6 density of this renuPst would decrensp the t joy hat area (tia1i �r of life w n in as well as add to the traffic flow on Carroll and Dove. I further have concerns about a_densi tv of this si 7.P wi th i tG Affart nn rirg; ,l if this request is approved, the type of fence that will be used as a buffer between the properties to SIGNATURE: the North FPncP hni l t Should he of ma rPri al of stone or brick designed ADDRESS : to be permanent. This would rule out a wooden or stockade fence. The -ffollow` ng form may be f i lled out and mailed to the City of Southlake Planning and Zoning Commission, 667 North Carr�lJ-Ai venues Southlake, Texas 76092 . t?.i I � REFERENCE NO. : ZA 9 4-15 �� u i �I am (in favor of) opposed to (undecided about) for the following reasons: Request ZA-94-15 would squeeze too many homes into too small an area. This would harm the surrounding neighborhoods as well as increase the amount o ra iIf c down Cnrrol l Avenue and thereby add to the dan ers- for, school children getting to Johnson Elementary, Carroll Middle and Interme fate oo s. 1 SIGNATURE: � I V, 1 ADDRESS : �y 1*66 ~- r f r WITRIN zto Aaa The following form may be filled out and mai to s r Southlake Planning and Zoning Commission, 667 No en , Southlake, Texas 76092 . REFERENCE NO. : ZA 94-14 I am (in favor of) (opposed to) (undecided about) the request for the following reas . CJUI�Aj SIGNATURE: 4% "-�<;fr` ADDRESS: �, �. �`1, �.Et- , . i G�fl�'Y�, y�� o��'�� C..��•�,.-tom-• • ours 1V15 zoo' March 2 , 1994 Mrs . Karen Gandy Re: Lonesome Dove' Estates Zoning Administrator City of Southlake Em. G67 North Carroll Avenue Soil It lake. TX 76092 Dear Mrs . Gandy: As it residents of Emerald Estates in Southlake, We are concerned about the zoning issues relating to the proposed adjacent deVo.lopment of Lonesome Dove Estates . 1 . We understand, the drainage for a high percentage of this new development is currently planned to be directed through a 30" pipe at the rate of 25 feet per second ( 187 gallons per second, 11 , 220 gallons per minute, 673 , 200 gallons per hour) . This pipe would then terminate at a culvert adjacent to my back yard. Obviously, there is high concern for the incremental volumes that at the least , our property will become a lake during periods of high run-off. We have already experience major problems in past years . 2 . There has been "talk" over the last several years about the dire need for a sewer system for Emerald Estates . The residents have petitioned the city to act on this matter to solve the high degree of surface sewage that is prevalent in the area. This is a severe health concern, and we would expect some action in this area. It is inconsistent to allow a new development to tap into the existing lift station on Carroll Avenue, while fording the current long term taxpayer residents of Emerald Estates to suffer sub-standard sanitation conditions . 3 . Although Lonesome Dove road is considered a normal residential street , it: is in fact a major route for those North of Dove. There is considerable concern that the infrastructure in this area will not support the additional homes planned for Lonesome Dove Estates . We recognize that detailed plans are normally submitted after coning and just prior to construction . However, in this case, it is better to address these issues early. We believe it is appropriate for the City of Southlake to require that pre- development detailed sewage and drainage plans be submitted by the developer prior to zoning rulings . We would then request that the city- engineers not only carefully analyze the plans as submitted, but also gain an in depth understanding of the abnormal drainage problems associated with this area. As you know, when it rains here, it rains with vigor ! Sincerely, a, 3 gg. gg� t J 7,1`09 MAR 03 '94 14:24 STONEBRIDGE CTRY CLB P.2/4 DOTS1D9 zoo' 4RER n. np - STONEBFIDGE 7MAR31994 . COUNTKY CLUBUTFU3 -- -- � - 7003 Beacon Hitt Road McKinney.Texas 75070 s (21," 'An-yam 529-5993 Utao a FAX(214) 540:5501 MAR 03 '94 14:25 STONEBRIDGE CTRY CI.B P.3/4 C014TAI'04 ' ewr "POOL- VI,A&_ .it,. 4/4 JQ- ��-4 Fellow Emerald Estates and nearby neighbors Feb. 27 From: Subiect:Progosed zoning P.U.D. ,Prel•iminary Dennis McGrath Plat Lonesome Dove Estates 2403 N. Carroll I believe the proposed subdivision is going to destroy the country atmosphere that we residences on the north side of town eniov. This subdivision is so out of character with everything around it. I beleive it is in our best interest to work together to defeat this rezoning. We need everyone within 200 feet of subdivision to call Karen Gandy, Planning Administrator, City of Southlake, 481 -5581 ,ext.743 and tell her that you are against this rezoning. If 20 % of the homeowners are against the rezoning it will take a super ma-iority of the Planning and Zoning Commision to aDorove the request . Thusly it will be substantially easier to defeat. This rezoning request by the developers is to best maximize their profits . This is not in our best interest or the best interest of Southlake. I believe it is in our best. interest to support the present SF 20 zoning and these are .my* reasons. The proposed Lonesome Dove has 82. 4 acres and 166 lots for a density' of 2. 00 dwellings per acre. The present SF 20 zoning has 72. 52 acres and 112 lots for a density of 1 . 54 dwellings Der acre. That is a difference of 54 fewer lots . The homes will cost more. This is a substantial decrease in densitv which translates into 100 fewer cars, 70 fewer kids going to school, 54 less houses means 2500 less heavy trucks and pick-uDs tearing uD our new road. 54 fewer homes means less city property tax base but more importantly 70 fewer students means our school taxes won' t go up. It takes approximately $5000 per student for education in the Carroll schools, while a $170, 000 generates $2770 in school taxes leaving a deficit of $2300 Per house. The present Lonesome Dove SF 20 has two phases. Phase 1 is final Platted and is the northern section of property. Phase 2 is the southern section of the Dropertv and the Parker property and has . onlv been preliminary platted. Lots around the Parker property would have to be zoned 30, 000 square foot lots and we can impress upon the city the need for better drainage solution. In the present zoning, I believe the developers don' t think they are .:iettinq big enou.;h rate of return on their money. This is not our concern. If they get their zoning they will develop, if not, I believe they will not develop the present zoning plan. If they are turned down, they might try to redo the present zoning SF 20 to get more lots but we will also be able voice our opinions I believe the worst case scenario with SF 20 zoning would be about 120 lots vs. 166 lots. Our best case scenario would be the developers not liking their rate of return would go away and not develop the Property. I urge everyone especially everyone within 200 feet to call Karen Gandy to voice vour opposition to this rezoning by March 1 . If you have any questions call we at 488-2277. Also, PLEASE, be at the Planning and Zoning meeting March 3, 7: 300m. SA-4( Mzu'm�j Z/!7�4 @ P►� h l February 17, 1994 Planning and Zoning Commission Southlake, Texas 76092 Dear Planning and Zoning Commission, First, I would like to state that I am not against the concept of Lonesome Dove Estates. However, I do have some concerns that I would like to share with you. 1 . I would like to see the existing 1 /2 minimum acre lot size continue to apply not only to Lonesome Dove Estates, but throughout the entire community of Southlake. 2. I would like to see the outer perimeter wall, if any, of Lonesome Dove Estates be a durable, long lasting, low maintenance brick/stone wall as in other subdivisions in the city of Southlake. This would make less of an impact on the residents already living in this area and make the addition more attractive to potential home buyers. 3 . Square footage of homes in Lonesome Dove Estates to be a minimum of 2000sq/ft. would also continue with the majority of homes built in the same area. 4 . Houses on Burney Ln. facing Burney, would eliminate the need for a brick/stone wall. This reducing need for expense and maintenance. This would also stay consistant with the surrounding developments. DUiS � ►Jc 2-OD F I . Patrick and Diana O'Teter 1599 Flamingo Circle Southlake, Texas 76092 00'� Patrick O Teter Diana O Teter SA-y!}: CITY OF SOUTH[ild"] , T15J!S ORDINANCE NO. 480- .BAN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 480, AS AlrIENDED, THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS; GRANTING A ZONING CHANGE ON A CERTAIN TRACT OR TRACTS OF LAND WITHIN THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS BEING . .. . .....V APPROXIMATELY A ... E ....... .. . .......... AND -T .......... M LETELY DEMMIRED....1N EXHIBIT !W' FROM 4, .. . ....... ................................ .REQUIRENlEN'TSN'I'P,IND IN............. IS ORDINANCE; CORRECTING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP; PRESERVING ALL OTHER PORTIONS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE; DETERMINING THAT THE PUBLIC INTEREST, MORALS AND GENERAL WELFARE DEMAND THE ZONING CHANGES AND AMENDMENTS HEREIN MADE; PROVIDING THAT THIS ORDINANCE SHALL BE CUMULATIVE OF ALL ORDINANCES; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY FOR VIOLATIONS HEREOF; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION IN THE OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. W REAS, the City of Sou a e, Texas is a hom y acting under its Charter adopted by the electorate pursuant to Article XI, Section 5 of the Texas Constitution and Chapter 9 of the Texas Local Government Code; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 211 of the Local Government Code, the City has the authority to adopt a comprehensive zoning ordinance and map regulating the location and use of buildings, other structures and land for business, industrial, residential and other purposes, and to amend said ordinance and map for the purpose of promoting the public health, safety, morals and general welfare, all in accordance with a comprehensive plan; and WHEREAS, the hereinafter described property is currently zoned as R ;..;.:.. ' :t:.:8. >. s. :. under the City s Comprehensive Zoning Ordi WHEREAS, a change in the zoning classification of said property was requested by a person or corporation having a proprietary interest in said property; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Southlake, Texas, at a public hearing called by the City Council did consider the following factors in making a determination as to whether these changes should be granted or denied: safety of the motoring public and the pedestrians using the facilities in the area immediately surrounding the sites; safety from fire hazards and damages; noise producing elements and glare of the vehicular and stationary lights and effect of such lights on established character of the neighborhood; location, lighting and types of signs and relation of signs to traffic control and adjacent property; street size and adequacy of width for traffic reasonably expected to be generated by the proposed use around the site and in the immediate C:\ORD\ZONING\480.114 U-4� Page 1 neighborhood; adequacy of parking as determined by requirements of this ordinance for off-street parking facilities; location of ingress and egress points for parking and off-street loading spaces, and protection of public health by surfacing on all parking areas to control dust; effect on the promotion of health ad the general welfare; effect on light and air; effect on the over- crowding of the land; effect on the concentration of population, and effect on transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks and other public facilities; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Southlake, Texas, further considered among other things the character of the districts and their peculiar suitability for particular uses and the view to conserve the value of the buildings, and encourage the most appropriate use of the land throughout this City; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Southlake, Texas, does find that there is a public necessity for the zoning changes, that the public demands them, that the public interest clearly requires the amendments, and that the zoning changes do not unreasonably invade the rights of those who bought or improved property with reference to the classification which existed at the time their original investment was made; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Southlake, Texas, does find that the changes in zoning lessen the congestion in the streets, helps secure safety from fire, panic, and other dangers, promotes the health and the general welfare, provides adequate light and air, prevents the over-crowding of land, avoids undue concentration of population, and facilitates the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks and other public requirements; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Southlake, Texas, has determined that there is a necessity and need for the changes in zoning and has also found and determined that there has been a change in the conditions of the property surrounding and in close proximity to the tract or tracts of land requested for a change since the tract or tracts of land were originally classified and therefore feels that the respective changes in zoning classification for the tract or tracts of land are needed, are called for, and are in the best interest of the public at large, the citizens of the city of Southlake, Texas, and helps promote the general health, safety and welfare of the community. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF.THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS: Section 1 . That Ordinance No. 480, the Comprehensive zoning Ordinance of the City of Southlake, Texas, passed on the 19th day of September, 1989, as originally adopted and amended, is hereby amended so that the permitted uses in the hereinafter described areas be altered, changed and amended as shown and described below: ................ Being approximately a ` '?' acre tract of land out of the �WeN::�.>:>:�..��.:::;:;;::: 1�r�... �::�:C��'i.:::>:�t� :.��.::.;::::>::A :�:�� .:>::�c�::::::>>;:��:€�:3>::>:, and more fully and competey cescribec in Exhibit "A, " attached hereto and incorporated herein. C:\ORD\ZONING\480.114 Page 2 U : : . . From ar.- .. u::.;.; dam:�..� :.::.:.:<.:::.::::::::::::.:::.::::.::.;::::.::.::::::::.::.:::::::::.....:::::::::.:...:.:::::::::::::..:..::::::::::::::::::::.................... Section 2 . That the City Manager is hereby directed to correct the Official Zoning map of the City of Southlake, Texas, to reflect the herein changes in zoning. Section 3 . That in all other respects the use of the tract or tracts of land herein above described shall be subject to all the applicable regulations contained in said Zoning Ordinance and all other applicable and pertinent ordinances for the City of Southlake, Texas . All existing sections, subsections, paragraphs, sentences, words, phrases and definitions of said Zoning Ordinance are not amended hereby, but remain intact and are hereby ratified, verified, and affirmed. Section 4 . That the zoning regulations and districts as herein established have been made in accordance with the comprehensive plan for the purpose of promoting the health, safety, morals and the general welfare of the community. They have been designed, with respect to both present conditions and the conditions reasonably anticipated to exist in the foreseeable future; to lessen congestion in the streets; to provide adequate light and air; to prevent over-crowding of land; to avoid undue concentration of population; and to facilitate the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewerage, drainage and surface water, parks and other commercial needs and development of the community. They have been made after a full and complete hearing with reasonable consideration among other things of the character of the district and its peculiar suitability for the particular uses and with a view of conserving the value of buildings and encouraging the most appropriate use of land throughout the community. Section 5 . That this ordinance shall be cumulative of all other ordinances of the City of Southlake, Texas, affecting zoning and shall not repeal any of the provisions of said ordinances except in those instances where provisions of those ordinances are in direct conflict with the provisions of this ordinance. Section 6 . That the terms and provisions of this ordinance shall be deemed to be severable and that if the validity of the zoning affecting any portion of the tract or tracts of land described herein shall be declared to be invalid, the same shall not affect the validity of the zoning of the balance of said tract or tracts of land described herein. Section 7 . Any person, firm or corporation who violates, disobeys, omits, neglects or refuses to comply with or who resists the enforcement of any of the provisions of this ordinance shall be fined not more than Two Thousand Dollars ($2, 000 . 00) for each offense . Each day that a violation is permitted to exist shall constitute a separate offense . Section 8 . All rights and remedies of the City of Southlake are expressly saved as to any and all violations of the provisions of Ordinance No. 480, as amended, or any other ordinances affecting zoning which have accrued at the time of the C:\ORD\ZONING\480.114 -) Page 3 4 — 5 v effective date of this ordinance; and, as to such accrued violations and all pending litigation, both civil and criminal, whether pending in court or not, under such ordinances, same shall not be affected by this ordinance but may be prosecuted until final disposition by the courts . Section 9 . The City Secretary of the City of Southlake is hereby directed to publish the proposed ordinance or its caption and penalty together with a notice setting out the time and place for a public hearing thereon at least ten (10) days before the second reading of this ordinance, and if this ordinance provides for the imposition of any penalty, fine or forfeiture for any violation of any of its provisions, then the City Secretary shall additionally publish this ordinance in the official City newspaper one time within ten (10) days after passage of this ordinance, as required by Section 3 . 13 of the Charter of the City of Southlake. Section 10 . This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and publication as required by law, and it is so ordained. PASSED AND APPROVED on the 1st reading the day of 1994 . MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY PASSED AND APPROVED on the 2nd reading the day of 1994 . MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: CITY ATTORNEY DATE: ADOPTED: EFFECTIVE: C:\ORD\ZONING\480.114 Page 4 I EXHIBIT "A" BEING a part of the N. E. THOMPSON SURVEY, Abstract No. 1563, situated in the city of Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas; embracing a portion of Tract No. 2, all of Tracts No. 1 and 3 described in the deed to Shannon E. Miller recorded in Volume 1569, Page 197, in the Deed Records, Tarrant County, Texas (D.R.T.C. ,TX. ) and all of a called 10 acre tract described in a deed to C. A. Parker of record in Volume 1311, Page 125, D.R.T.C. , TX. , being more particularly described by metes and bounds as follows: Beginning at a 1" iron for the Northwest corner of said C. A. Parker tract and the Northeast corner of a tract described in a deed to the city of Southlake of record in Volume 5698, Page 304, D.R.T.C. , TX. , said point also being by deed calls, South 89 degrees 37 minutes East 30.0 feet and South 00 degrees 23 -minutes West, 1, 045.3 feet from the Northwest corner of said Thompson Survey; THENCE North 00 degrees 22 minutes 12 seconds East, along the east line of said 30 feet wide strip described in the deed to the city of Southlake recorded in Volume 5752, Page 48, D.R.T.C. , TX. for the said east line of North Carroll Avenue, 1,045.3 feet to a railroad spike for the Northeast corner of said City tract in the North line of said Survey and said Tract No. 2, in Burney Lane. THENCE South 89 degrees 37 minutes East, along the said North line of Survey, the said North line of Tract No. 2, in said Burney Lane,. 2, 122.93 feet to a railroad spike for the Northeast corner of said Survey and Tract No. 2. THENCE South 00 degrees 22 minutes 57 seconds West, along the East line of said Survey and the East line of said Tract No. 2, to and. along the East line of said Tract No. 3, a distance of 1, 485.54 feet to the Southeast corner of said Tract No. 3 and the Northeast corner of the 0.308 acre tract described in the deed to Lonesome Dove Cemetery Association recorded in Volume 9239, Page 762, D.R.T.C. , TX. ; THENCE North 89 degrees 58 minutes 33 seconds West, along the North line of said 0 . 308 acre tract and along a line in said Tract No. 3, 511.67 feet to a 2-1/2" chain link fence post for the Northwest corner on said 0. 308 acre tract; THENCE South 00 degrees 26 minutes 29 seconds East 269.99 feet, along the West line of said 0.308 acre tract to a 1" iron for the southerly Southeast corner of said Tract No. 3, and the Southwest corner of 0. 308 acre tract; THENCE North 89 degrees 22 minutes 19 seconds West 1, 615.23 feet, along the South line of said Tract No. 3 and said called 10 acre Tract and along the North line of Block 1 of Emerald Estates as recorded in Volume 388-165, Page 48 of the Plat Records of Tarrant County, Texas (P.R.T.C. , TX. ) , to a 1/211' iron set in same at the Southeast corner of the tract described in a deed to the city of Southlake in Volume 5698, Page 304, D.R.T.C. , TX. ; THENCE North 00 degrees 24 minutes 23 seconds East 706.45 feet, along the East line of the last referenced tract said line being the East R.O.W. of N. Carroll Avenue and the West line of said called 10 acre tract to the Point of Beginning and containing 82.4 acres. C:\ORD\ZONING\480.114 Page 5 SA �� ` City of Southlake,Texas M E M O R A N D U M March 31, 1994 ' TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Karen P. Gandy, Zoning Administrator SUBJECT: ZA 94-15 Preliminary Plat of Lonesome Dove Estates REQUESTED ACTION: Preliminary Plat of Lonesome Dove Estates, being 82.4 acres situated in the N. E. Thompson Survey, Abstract No. 1563, of which 31.196 acres being recorded as Lonesome Dove Estates, Phase I, in Cabinet 'A' , Slide No. 546, P.R.T.C.T. LOCATION: North of Emerald Estates, East of North Carroll Avenue, South of Burney Lane, and West of Lonesome Dove Avenue OWNER: Mary M. Arnold, Gary Cantrell, Larry D. Parker, Sharon K. Parker, Cindy Atkinson, and Randy A. Parker APPLICANT: Tom M. Matthews, Jr. d/b/a Hat Creek Development CURRENT ZONING: "AG" Agricultural (9.53 acres) and "SF-20A" Single-Family Residential (72.88 acres) REQUESTED ZONING: "R-P.U.D. " Residential Planned Unit Development LAND USE CATEGORY: Medium Density Residential NO. NOTICES SENT: Forty-eight (48) RESPONSES: See ZA 94-14 for area residents' concerns. P & Z ACTION: February 17, 1994; Approved (6-0) to table ZA 94-15 and continue the Public Hearing to the March 3, 1994 Planning and Zoning meeting at the applicant's request. March 3, 1994; Approved (4-1) subject to the Plat Review Summary dated February 25, 1994 noting on #9 eliminating curb and linear street requirements for lots on Carroll Ave. and making the approval based on tonight's submittal of the preliminary plat. COUNCIL ACTION: March 15, 1994; Approved (4-0) to table until April 5, 1994 City Council meeting at applicants' request. STAFF COMMENTS: The applicant has met all the review comments of the third Plat Review Summary dated March 11, 1994 with the exception of those items addressed in the attached fourth Plat Review Summary dated April 1, 1994. zpa__ KPG/gj C:\WPF\MEM0\CASES\94-15.pp zlwi Iliillll�IIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIII ly='A -- 'illlllllllill `�� 46 IIIlilllllllll nn nun , all. 10; ISM �OF 1006311 `ice - �IE r - ■■� ��++ : .h S Will� r: � � ■ r� NI A /p' Malin.� �L . mTRACT MAP MIN ,.,,,, sue. � �. ■.��;;, mix H. �,, of ry « cc J n Z ^ w W .•c =• i I ^y cc r m'fi m r n \ F n I Mm Mmm 1 1 < V ` Z ►•�t^N m^ � Z ..< cc ~ N t u ¢I U - Ali ^ 8 I Z m u �- LU — — 3AV�AO9-3110S l— — — — — — — — ♦ , I — u 14 • � E T— g x n I =m M 3 SInis v I I cu OS 0 N cr 8Qo C�c $ Q I o o s m z5 m w a m = .]y m S Rmw 09 .. . I M : •w -C�cy w u m K LT \ P • 1 w ~w R w 12» Q • PI 1 ti w m d W ^ •+ b .$$m • 90 < UlS m ^ w Z : cr 12, in NA•IYmn N t <L � \i FM FF�1••F ^ �� ♦ F Y .• T tP 3 v ♦ n -CA H .� S w _ .\ C w• A Q m Y wcn a m N co cc 0- E u" I � • J m cc a } ♦•\ , w Y G ()ldd t ^ N C O •�1.�.. * I • O s I i ` • n i c 0O p � mnN N N^ o c y W 1 •[ tC m OG p N J bo � I i j• m r City of Southlake,Texas PLAT REVIEW SUMMARY CASE NO: ZA 94-15 REVIEW NO: FOUR DATE OF REVIEW: 04/01/94 PROJECT NAME: Preliminary Plat - Lonesome Dove Estates OWNER/APPLICANT: ENGINEER/SURVEYOR: Hat Creek Development J.E. Levitt Engineers, Inc. 5501 Greenbrier Drive 726 Commerce Street Dallas, TX 75209 Suite 104 Southlake, TX 76092 PHONE: PHONE: (817) 488-3313 FAX: FAX: (817) 488-3315 CITY STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE ABOVE REFERENCED PROJECT RECEIVED BY THE CITY ON 03/28/94 AND WE OFFER THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS. THESE STIPULATIONS ARE HEREBY MADE CONDITIONS OF PLAT APPROVAL UNLESS SPECIFICALLY AMENDED BY THE CITY COUNCIL. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR NEED FURTHER CLARIFICATION, PLEASE CONTACT TOM ELGIN AT (817) 481-5581, EXT. 753. 1. Provide the name of the record owner and deed record volume and page for the following unplatted property within 200': A. Tract south of Quail Creek Estates B. Tracts across adjacent Lonesome Dove Road R.O.W. 2. The city limit line as shown is incorrect. Show the city limit line in the R.O.W. of Lonesome Dove and as it deflects east of Lonesome Dove Road at the following locations: south of S. Gravel Road, north of N. Gravel Road, and south of Burney Lane. 3. Correct the existing zoning on adjacent Quail Creek Estates and Hudson Bay Estates platted property to "SF-lA". 4. Correct the location of the P.O.B. on the graphic to match legal description. 5. Show the general outline of area embraced by tree cover. (If none, please state.) 6. The following changes are needed with regard to easements: A. Show and label proposed easements as shown on preliminary water, sewer, and drainage plans. Do not center interior easements for water, sanitary sewer, or drainage on common lot lines. Offset so that improvements are in one lot or the other. B. Provide a 5' U.E. along the common line with Emerald Estates east of proposed 15' U.E. for the extension of the 8" water line. 3' C. Provide a 5' U.E. along the common line with Lonesome Dove Cemetery. r 7. Dimension the existing R.O.W. along Carroll Avenue at the C.I.S.D. property and the R.O.W. along Burney Lane at the Hudson Oaks property. Label the centerline of each R.O.W. and pavement if different. The thoroughfare plan indicates a 60' R.O.W. for the section of N. Carroll Avenue to which the property fronts. Lonesome Dove Road and Burney Lane are classified as residential streets. The R.O.W. dedications therefore should be as follows: A. Carroll Avenue - 60' from the west R.O.W. line along Quail Creek Estates and 30' from the apparent centerline of Carroll Avenue along the unplatted C.I.S.D. and S.T. Burney tracts. B. Burney Lane - 50' from the north R.O.W. line along Harbor Oaks, Burney Place, Dove Estates, and Hudson Bay Estates. C. Lonesome Dove Road - 25' east and west of the apparent centerline of Lonesome Dove Road except for the portion within the City of Grapevine. Indicate intention to dedicate R.O.W within Grapevine by separate instrument. 8. The existing original Lonesome Dove Estates plat will have to be vacated prior to the consideration of the final plat of this rendition of Lonesome Dove Estates. At the time of vacation, the property dedicated as R.O.W. in the plat will revert to the owners at the time of its filing. If this ownership is not the same, the applicant will have to acquire the property and dedicate R.O.W. according to the thoroughfare plan. r 9. Label all front building setback lines, especially at any breakpoints or discontinuation. 10. Dimension the R.O.W. width of Deets Trail at the intersection of Lonesome Dove Road, and label the radius of the cul-de-sac on Hat Creek Court and the "knuckle" at the north end of Powder River Trail. 11. Correct the rear lot dimensions of Lots 4 & 10, Block 2. 12. The zoning ordinance requires that a common open space be dedicated which comprises "not less than ten percent (10%) of the total area devoted to residential use." (Section 30.10). Previous planned unit developments have provided this based on "gross" acreage. This developer proposes netting out the perimeter R.O.W. prior to the calculation. The 7.976-acre park does not meet the gross acreage requirement. Staff does not have a problem with the interpretation proposed (i.e. 10% of residential use area opW. 13. The subdivision ordinance requires "A minimum are o t lots shall be required on all lots adjacent to platted property -1 or RE." Lot 1, Block 1 does not meet this requirem i 1 * Although not required by ordinance, staff would appreciate placing "Case No. ZA 94-15" in the lower right corner for ease of reference. * Our review indicates that 72 of the 141 internal lots (51%)meet the curvilinear requirements. The subdivision ordinance requires fifty percent (50%) of the lots fronting on local streets within the subdivision to have a curved front lot line for more than fifty percent (50%) of the lot frontage. * No utility easements to serve the interior lots have been shown. Provide all appropriate easements depending on the intentions to provide electric from the front or rear of the lots. * Denotes Informational Comment cc: Mary Arnold L.D. Parker Hat Creek Development �,r J.E. Levitt Engineers, Inc. i j " `•ihxl a$t�i =' al j i I•i = •"d I f #t ! i � i rji'8�iic r; spi t; I li f a -S f a 1t . ii. s o YfYl i -al lYf i`t 4 Y1y s ti li '� ,.1 f t� A W o .._: 11i.� Iij,,t i t � . a p .ii•�" "Y�Y.�. •Y, r•� wE- $ +� !dlt� (�° Y�+.Y• ag; $ o its t i t s i ...: @ •t t=_ �i .+� 1•I.niYst� •Yi1 i+�+_•�� iii• OE- I +� a ails. ! E- p 0 1+ ` .-t. .t. .-t . t� as i ;ii ai,+ }j•.it '� ;•9 �;'i�j' t1� •= Y W W e v� sic `Qi' o t! s FFiE •li:ttti •t�L+•1IY•;i 7777 ya , • 11!• + 7+ • w t;,,= •Yigat� Yjaiip Y+€E Yt Yi:• ,Ys o 9 atY Ylii'i ' 0{{1y1.1jil yg 1 44.i,'!d Ir ppi I •t pi�1i a i5 �.iitl��tj�t/1i.il�it.l 11Ya{t�11•�1ti�latt�tt�tJli Ititll .wn.WKKM C1ffVNn ' •.ts s ` y z 30 s .qq 0 �� x 1 •R R �' R I h �' y R ! R Rago (J 8 gig tt . a ■3y°0SE • m s i 1 gJill v: Arm �$' i ` A .T A rr•.ram r�. w nw. .� � i ' f :<� � _ � �---=--'BWii•iJir`-iflAiY' QI�Oi-- � ^ \�p I - --yi�,�j ♦ L.], i i fidd 1 0 O l B e AMM SWUM"$SMW 53AVII. ■.a.• ��r i r � � City of Southlake,Texas CITY MA AGER MEMORANDUM March 29, 1994 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Billy Campbell, Director, Department of Public Safety SUBJECT: Wrecker & Towing Ordinance Attached is the proposed Wrecker & Towing Ordinance for first reading by Council . References to storage of a vehicle have been stricken from the Ordinance and will be addressed through the zoning process if applicable. We are proposing a wrecker ordinance that governs licensing of wreckers, to include requirements dictating conduct, and permits the City to enter into a contract for single wrecker service. It is recommended that we engage in a single vendor system for regulating City business and that we provide a permitting process for in town wreckers to ensure reasonable service and protection for our citizens. The City of Hurst, Euless and Forest Hill are some of the cities within the area that use the single contract vendor. The single contract vendor is specific to City business only and does not prohibit other wrecker companies from doing business with the City of Southlake or its citizens . A summary of the substantive sections of this ordinance are as follows : Section II - Definitions Section III .A. - Is a license requirement to provide wrecker service within the City. Section III .B. - Provides for exceptions . Section IV. - Is the application process and requirements, to include a list of charges to their customers . Section V. - Provides for license issuance and fees. It is recommended that such fees be nominal covering administration of the licensing. Section VI . - The vehicle requirements for those seeking a permit . ,E � e - J t ; a Memorandum - Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager Wrecker & Towing Ordinance March 29, 1994 Page 2 Section VII . - Provides for record keeping and inspection. Section VIII . - Discusses license denial, suspension and revocation. Section IX. - Sets the limits of insurance accepted by the City. These limits are transposed from State law governing wrecker service. It also requires that a copy of the insurance policy be submitted to the City and an updated copy be maintained with the City Secretary throughout the license period. Section X. - Vehicle Removal - Prohibits removal of vehicle without permission. Section XI . - Establishes requirements and operating procedures for wrecker service . Section XII . - Establishes rules of conduct . Section XIII . - Provides the City the right to contract single wrecker service to provide towing for City vehicles or tows and/or impoundment of any vehicle made necessary in the exercise of the City' s police and governmental functions . Also to provide that any wrecker may be called by the City in an emergency situation. Section XIV. - Miscellaneous provisions . Section XVII . - Provides for a penalty clause. A proposed contract is being drawn up by the City Attorney' s Office . The contract can only be adopted after the second reading. We will submit the contract for Council review at that time in conjunction with a request to submit for bids . The contract would be utilized in the bid process for any wrecker company wishing to do business with us as a single vendor. I am available for any questions or comments that you might have. BC/mr Attachment wp\Memo\WrekTow3.Ord s ORDINANCE NO. / 0 WRECKER ORDINANCE AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE REGULATION OF WRECKE AND TOWING COMPANIES OPERATING IN THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE; REQUIRING A LICENSE TO CONDUCT WRECKER SERVICES WITHIN THE CITY; PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE, SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION OF LICENSES; PROVIDING REQUIREMENTS FOR WRECKER VEHICLES AND STORAGE FACILITIES; PROVIDING OPERATING PROCEDURES FOR WRECKERS;PROHIBITING SOLICITATION OF WRECKER BUSINESS; AUTHORIZING THE CONTRACTING BY THE CITY OF A SINGLE WRECKER SERVICE COMPANY;PROVIDING THAT THIS ORDINANCE SHALL BE CUMULATIVE OF ALL ORDINANCES; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY FOR VIOLATIONS HEREOF;PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE;PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION IN THE OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER;AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. S, the City of Southlake, Texas is a home rule City acti der its charter adopted by the electorate pursuant to Article XI, Section 5 of the Texas Constitution and Chapter 9 of the Local Government Code; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Southlake, Texas deems it necessary and proper and in the best interests of the health, safety, morals and general welfare of its citizenry to adopt an ordinance regulating wrecker and towing services. NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS: SECTION I. PURPOSE The purpose of this ordinance is to provide a safe and efficient vehicle wrecker and towing service within the City of Southlake for the benefit of the public and as needed and required by the Southlake Department of Public Safety. f:\files\muni\slake\ordinanc\wrecker.004(02-23-94) C- 3 r SECTION II. ' DEFINITIONS In this ordinance the following words shall have the meanings ascribed to them below: Accident means any occurrence that renders a vehicle wrecked or disabled. City means the City of Southlake, Texas. Director of Public Safety means the Director of Public Safety of the City of Southlake, or his designated representative. Disabled Vehicle means a motor vehicle that has been rendered unsafe to be driven as the result of some occurrence, including, but not limited to mechanical failure or breakdown, fire or vandalism, or a motor vehicle that is in a safe driving condition but who's owner or operator is not present, able or permitted to drive so as to reasonably necessitate that the vehicle be removed by a wrecker. Motor Vehicle means every vehicle which is self propelled. Non-consent Tow means the towing of a vehicle without the prearranged knowledge and consent of the owner or operator of said vehicle. Examples include, but are not limited to, vehicles towed when the driver is incapacitated following an accident, vehicles towed when the driver has been arrested, vehicles removed from public or private property without pre-notification to the vehicle owner, repossessions and seizures. Non-resident Wrecker or Tow Truck Operator means a wrecker or tow truck operator registered with the State of Texas who does not maintain a place of business within the corporate limits of the City of Southlake. Person means an individual, firm, partnex-3hip, association, corporation, company or organization of any kind. Vehicle means every mechanical device in, upon or by which any person or property is or may be transported or drawn upon a public highway except devices moved by human power or used exclusively upon stationary rails or tracks. Wrecked Vehicle means a discarded, abandoned,junked,wrecked or worn out motor vehicle that is not in a condition to be lawfully operated on a public road. Wrecker means a vehicle designed to be used primarily for removing wrecked or disabled vehicles. Wrecker or Tow Truck Operator means a,person engaged in the business of using a wrecker to tow, winch or otherwise move a motor vehicle. <` f:\files\muni\slake\ordinanc\wrecker.004(02-23-94) 2 �C— SECTION III. ' LICENSE REQUIRED A. Requirements. 1. Every person desiring to provide a wrecker or towing service within the City shall first obtain a license from the City Secretary. It shall be unlawful to engage in a wrecker or towing business within the City without first obtaining a license, regardless of whether the business is located inside or outside the City, except as provided by this ordinance. 2. A person who charges a fee for towing wrecked or disabled vehicles, whether by the use of a wrecker or by the use of any other vehicle utilizing ropes, chains or other mechanisms, shall be considered to be engaging in a wrecker or towing business. This shall not be construed to include a service car or other vehicle not equipped with mechanical devices for transporting wrecked vehicles and not used for such purpose, such as service cars equipped with compressed air containers and tools for performing minor repairs not involving towing or transportation of wrecked or disabled vehicles. B. Exceptions. No license shall be required for the following activities: 1. The transportation of a vehicle by a non-resident wrecker operator from some point outside the City to some destination within the City. 2. The transportation of a vehicle by a non-resident wrecker operator from some point outside the City and traversing the City to some other destination outside of the City. 3. The transportation of a vehicle by a non-resident wrecker operator at the request of the owner or operator of a vehicle which is located within the City. SECTION IV. APPLICATION FOR LICENSE; REQUIREMENTS All applicants for a wrecker license must file a written application with the Director of Public Safety. The application shall be verified by the applicant and shall be on a form f.\files\muni\slake\ordinanc\wrecker.004(02-23-94) 3 � C_ furnished by the Director of Public Safety and shall contain the following minimum information: 1. The business or trade name, address and telephone number of the wrecker company. 2. The name, address and telephone number of the owner of the wrecker business. If the applicant is a corporation, the following information shall also be included: its name, the date and place of incorporation, the address of its principal place of business, the names and residences of all its officers and directors, the names and residences of all its stockholders owning ten percent or more of the total issued capital stock and the amount of stock owned by each of them, the total amount and nature of its authorized capital stock, a certified copy of its charter and by-laws, and a certified copy of its authorization to do business in the State of Texas. If the applicant is a partnership, the following information shall also be included: its name, the type of partnership, the names and residences of all its partners owning then percent or more of the ownership interest in the partnership and their percentage of ownership. 3. The name, driver's license number, address and telephone numbers of the persons who will operate the applicant's wrecker vehicles in the City and who will have access to the applicant's storage area. 4. The normal hours of operation of the wrecker business. 5. The location and a description of the applicant's storage facility where all disabled and wrecked vehicles will be stored, including the number of spaces available for the storage of towed vehicles, whether the spaces are enclosed or open, the type of security for the protection of the vehicles and the normal hours of operation of the storage facility. 6. The number of wreckers for which permits are desired. 7. The design and color scheme of each wrecker to be used and the lettering and logos to be used thereon. 8. The year, make, model, vehicle identification number, license plate number, railroad commission number and load capacity of each wrecker to be licensed. 9. A full and complete statement of the experience, if any, the applicant has had in rendering wrecker service in the City or elsewhere. f.\files\nuni\slake\ordinanc\wreckerA04(02-23-94) 4 C- 10. A list of any unpaid judgments of record against the applicant, which lists shall include the name and address of each owner of a judgment and the amount of such judgment. If the applicant is a partnership, a list shall be furnished for each partner, general or limited, owning a ten percent or more interest in the partnership. If the applicant is a corporation, a list shall be furnished for each of its officers and directors, as well as for each stockholder owning ten percent or more of the total issued capital stock. 11. A list of any convictions of the applicant for violations of any federal state and municipal laws other than traffic statutes. If the applicant is a partnership, a list shall be furnished for each individual partner, general or limited, owning ten percent or more interest in the partnership. If the applicant is a corporation, a list shall be furnished for each of its officers and directors, as well as for each stockholder owning ten percent or more of the total issued capital stock. 12. A list of any liens, mortgages or other encumbrances on the wreckers owned by the applicant for which permits are requested. Such list shall include the amount secured by each lien and mortgage or other incumbrance, the amount due, the character of such lien, or each other incumbrance, and the name and address of the holder of such lien, mortgage or other incumbrance. 13. A statement of the applicant's fees for towing and storage services, including, but not necessarily limited to the following: a. Charges for basic vehicle, truck and motorcycle tows; b. Charges for up-righting an overturned vehicle; C. Charges when the drive line must be disconnected for towing; d. Charges for changing of tires to accommodate towing; e. Charges for use of additional dolly wheels; f. Charges for any specialized equipment; g. Charges for the use of winch pulling; h. Charges for use of trailer or flat bed for hauling; and i. Daily storage fees. f.\files\muni\slake\ordinanc\wrecker.004(02-23-94) 5 � C ` l 14. An agreement by the applicant to comply with all of the terms and conditions of this ordinance and any regulations and requirements for wrecker and towing services which have been promulgated by the City and the state as well as any conditions or requirements set forth in the license. 15. A telephone number to be maintained twenty-four (24) hours a day, seven (7) days a week, including holidays for contact by the Department of Public Safety. 16. Such"other information as the Director of Public Safety shall find reasonably necessary to effectuate the purposes of this ordinance and to arrive at a fair determination of whether the requirements of this ordinance have been complied with. SECTION V. LICENSE ISSUANCE; FEES; PRORATION A. Upon payment of the applicable license fees, all applications for wrecker licenses shall be reviewed by the Director of Public Safety and forward to the City Secretary for filing. The City Secretary shall issue a wrecker license to all applicants complying with the provisions of this ordinance and all regulations and requirements for wrecker and towing services which have been promulgated by the City and the state. In addition, the City Secretary shall issue permits for each wrecker to be operated by the wrecker business. Licenses shall expire on December 31st in the year in which they are issued. The license shall not be transferable and no permit shall be used on any wrecker other than the one for which it was issued. B. The annual fee for a wrecker license shall be established by the City Council by resolution. The license fee shall be prorated on a monthly basis for all licenses issued for any period less than twelve months. Such fee shall be refunded to the applicant in the event the license is refused; however, no license fees shall be refunded if the license is suspended or revoked under the provisions of this ordinance. SECTION VI. VEHICLE REQUIREMENTS A. Each wrecker for which a permit is issued shall meet the following minimum requirements: 1. Each wrecker shall not be less than 3/4 ton in size. f:\files\muni\slake\ordinanc\wreckerDO4(02-23-94) 6 2. Each wrecker shall be equipped with a power take-off winch line and boom or lifting device with a factory rated capacity of not less than ten thousand (10,000) pounds single capacity. 3. Each wrecker shall carry as standard equipment safety chains, a fire extinguisher, wrecking bar, broom, axe, shovel, either flares or traffic control reflectors, a wheel dolly and a container to carry debris. 4. Each wrecker shall have inscribed on each side in letters not less than three (3) inches in height the name, address and telephone number of the wrecker business. 5. Each wrecker shall be equipped with an overhead flashing emergency light which shall be rotating and visible at a distance of fifteen hundred (1,500) feet in all directions. 6. Each wrecker shall be equipped so as to provide two-way voice communication by telephone or radio with the licensee's base station at all times. B. A person commits an offense if he operates a wrecker or uses any equipment within the City that is not in compliance with all of the requirements of this ordinance. SECTION VII. RECORD KEEPING; INSPECTION A. All licensed wrecker businesses shall maintain books and records re lecting their operation in accordance with generally accepted accounting principals as may be necessary for verification of the licensee's compliance with the terms of this ordinance. The licensee agrees to make such records available at reasonable times to any member of the Department of Public Safety upon request. B. Members of the Department of Public Safety may inspect each wrecker and/or storage facility used by the licensee at reasonable times during the application or license period to insure compliance with the requirements of this ordinance. f:\files\muni\slake\ordinanc\wrecker.004(02-23-94) 7 C —1 SECTION VIII. LICENSE DENIAL; SUSPENSION; OR REVOCATION A. The Director of Public Safety may refuse to approve the issuance or renewal of a wrecker license or may suspend or revoke a wrecker license previously issued for one or more of the following reasons: 1. The making by the applicant of any false statement or omission of information as to a material matter in an application for a license or license renewal or in a hearing concerning the license. 2. Conviction of the applicant, licensee or an employee of the applicant or licensee for a violation of a provision of this ordinance. 3. Revocation pursuant to this section of a license issued to the applicant or any owner, partner or corporate officer of the applicant within three (3) years preceding the application. 4. Conviction of the applicant or licensee of a felony, assault, fraud, burglary, theft, DWI or other offense involving moral turpitude within five (5) years preceding the application. 5. Suspension of a license on three occasions within the preceding twelve (12) months, more than three (3) days on each occasion. 6. Habitual failure to respond to the scene of an accident within thirty (30) minutes notification. 7. Failure to comply with any of the requirements of this ordinance. B. No license shall be suspended or revoked without notice to the licensee and an opportunity for a hearing. A licensee who receives notice of a proposed suspension or revocation may file a written request for a hearing with tba Director of Public Safety within ten (10) days from the date of the notice. The Director of Public Safety shall conduct a hearing and shall thereafter determine whether to suspend or revoke the license. C. Any person who's application for a wrecker license has been denied, suspended or revoked by the Director of Public Safety shall have the right to appeal such denied, suspension or revocation to the City Manager within ten (10) calendar days after notification of such denial, suspension or revocation. The City Manager shall review the matter and may uphold, modify or reverse the denial, suspension or revocation of the wrecker license. The decision of the City Manager shall be final. f:\files\muni\slake\ordinanc\wreckerM4(02-23-94) 8 v C• - 1 SECTION IX. INSURANCE A. No license shall be issued by the City unless the wrecker operator shall procure and keep in full force and effect automobile liability insurance and garage keepers liability insurance or truck cargo insurance written by an insurance company authorized to do business in the State of Texas and acceptable to the City and issued in the standard form approved by the State Board of Insurance. Such policies of insurance shall require at least twenty (20) days written notice to the City of any cancellation or termination or of any material change in the terms of the insurance coverage. The insurance policies shall contain appropriate provisions to cover all wreckers and wrecker operators conducting business under the license. B. The automobile liability insurance must provide combined single limits of liability for bodily injury and property damage of not less than one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000.00) for any person killed or injured, five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000.00) for more than one person killed or injured in any one accident, and one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000.00) for property damage and theft coverage on all vehicles removed or impounded. The automobile liability insurance must also meet the minimum requirements under the laws of the State of Texas. C. The garage keepers liability insurance or tow truck cargo insurance, whichever is maintained, must provide limits of liability for any one loss of not less than fifty thousand dollars ($50,000.00). D. A copy of the required insurance policies shall be submitted to the City at the time of application for a wrecker license and a current copy of such policies shall be maintained with the City Secretary throughout the license period. SECTION X. VEHICLE REMOVAL A. No person may drive a wrecker to the scene of an accident on the streets of the City unless the person has been called to the scene by the Department of Public Safety or by the owner or operator of the vehicle. B. No vehicle, whether or not the vehicle is wrecked or disabled, for which the owner or operator of the vehicle has not given their consent to tow shall be removed by a wrecker company from its location in the City to another location without first notifying the Department of Public Safety of such intended removal and the destination of the vehicle. f.\files\muni\slake\ordinanc\wrecker.004(02-23-94) 9 C. An police officer, in the exercise o y p f his discretion, may direct that any vehicle shall be taken by the driver of the wrecker directly to the City pound and there held by the City for inspection or investigation to determine the cause or reason for the accident that such vehicle was involved in or such vehicle's disability or for any lawful purpose. SECTION XI. REQUIREMENTS AND OPERATING PROCEDURES FOR WRECKER SERVICE The wrecker licensee and operator shall comply with the following requirements and procedures: A. Arrive at the accident within a reasonable time after having been notified to do so. Such response time shall generally not exceed thirty (30) minutes. B. Deliver the wrecked or disabled vehicle to a location designated by the owner or operator of the vehicle or by the Department of Public Safety. C. Upon arrival at the scene of an accident, promptly clear the wreckage and debris from the traveled portion of the roadway and confine it to the smallest possible portion of the traveled roadway while removal is taking place and in a manner to minimize the duration of the interference with normal traffic flow and completely remove from the site of the accident all resulting wreckage or debris, including all broken glass, but excluding truck or vehicle cargos, before leaving the site. D. To the extent feasible, comply with all traffic regulations in removing any vehicle from the scene of an accident. Under no circumstances shall any vehicle be moved or towed in such a manner as to jeopardize the safety of other vehicles on the roadway. E. Keep and maintain wrecker vehicles and towing equipment in a safe and working condition to insure that said wrecker and equipment are adequate to perform towing services. F. Depart the scene of an accident at the request of a police officer when such wrecker has not been called to the scene in compliance with this ordinance. f:\files\muni\slake\ordinanc\wreckerA04(02-23-94) 10 Y SECTION XII.r SOLICITATION OF WRECKER BUSINESS A. No person may solicit in any manner, directly or indirectly, on the streets of the City, the business of towing a vehicle which is wrecked or disabled regardless of whether the solicitation is for the purpose of soliciting business of towing, removing, repairing, storing, trading or purchasing the vehicle. B. Proof of the presence of a person engaged in the wrecker business, either as owner, operator, employee or agent, on a street in the City, at or near the scene of an accident, who has not been called to the scene by the Department of Public Safety or the owner or operator of the vehicle, within one hour after the happening of an accident is prima facia evidence of a solicitation in violation of this section. C. No police officer or other employee of the City shall recommend to any person, directly or indirectly, the name of any particular person engaged in wrecker business for which solicitation is prohibited, nor shall any police officer or other City employee attempt to influence in any manner a decision of a person in selecting a wrecker operator. SECTION MR. WRECKER SERVICE AGREEMENT A. The City shall have the right to contract with a single wrecker service company who the City shall utilize for the towing of City vehicles or for the towing or impoundment of any vehicle made necessary in the exercise of the City's police and governmental functions. B. The City may call any wrecker company or use any wrecker in cases where the contractor is unable to respond as required by the agreement,when there exists an emergency situation or when deemed necessary by the Director of Public Safety or his authorized representative. In all cases, a report will be forwarded to the Director of Public Safety describing the circumstances involving such use. SECTION X1V. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS A. Licensees shall notify the Department of Public Safety of any and all personnel changes for those persons who will operate the wrecker vehicles within ten (10) calendar days of such personnel changes and additional t f.\files\muni\slake\ordinanc\wrecker.004(02-23-94) 11 � L` � J drivers must first be approved by the Director of Public Safety prior to operating any wrecker vehicle within the City limits. B. No wrecker company shall charge more than those rates stated in the application for a wrecker license. C. The licensee shall notify the Department of Public Safety of any change in ownership of the wrecker company or any change in the number of wreckers, location of a storage facility, or any other material change in the information provided on the application for a license within ten (10) calendar days of such change. SECTION XV. 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. Ordinance No. 205 is hereby repealed in its entirety. SECTION XVI. 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. f:\files\muni\slake\ordinanc\wrecker.004(02-23-94) 12 � C_ A � SECTION XVII. 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 XVIII. SAVINGS CLAUSE All rights and remedies of the City of Southlake are expressly saved as to any and all violations of the provisions of Ordinance No. 205 or any other ordinances affecting wrecker service and the towing of vehicles which have accrued at the time of the effective date of this ordinance; and, as to such accrued violations and all pending litigation, both �lw► civil and criminal, whether pending in court or not, under such ordinances, same shall not be affected by this ordinance but may be prosecuted until final disposition by the courts. SECTION M. 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 f:\files\muni\slake\ordinanc\wrecker.004(02-23-94) 13 C— �� one time within ten days after passage of this ordinance, as required by Section 3.13 of the Charter of the City of Southlake. SECTION XX. EFFECTIVE DATE This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and publication as required by law, and it is so ordained. PASSED AND APPROVED ON FIRST READING ON THIS DAY OF . 1994. MAYOR ATTEST: '�Ir► CITY SECRETARY PASSED AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING ON THIS DAY OF 91994. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY f.\files\muni\slake\ordinanc\wrecker.004(02-23-94) 14 APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: City Attorney Date: :p- --2 3 ADOPTED: EFFECTIVE: f:\files\muni\slake\ordinanc\wreckeriM(02-23-94) 15 ('_- l City of Southlake,Texas RESOLUTION NO. 94-15 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS, ESTABLISHING DATES FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS ON THE PROPOSED ANNEXATION OF PROPERTY INTO THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS, THAT: Section 1. The City Council hereby declares two (2) public hearing shall be held on the 19th day of April, 1994, at 7: 00 p.m. and on the 3rd day of May, 1994, at 7:00 p.m. each during Regular City Council Meetings, to discuss the annexation of property more particularly described in the attached Exhibit "A" . Section 2. The City Secretary is hereby authorized to have the appropriate notices published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City and within the territory to be annexed. Section 3. This Resolution shall be effective from and after its adoption by the City Council. PASSED AND APPROVED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF APRIL, 1994 . CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS BY: ATTEST: Sandra L. LeGrand City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney =%ms\=nex\pubh"r\sl EXHIBIT'A' ANNEXATION TRACT BEING a tract of land in the C.M. Throop Survey,Abstract 1510, by Deed to Thurman Head and wife, Laura Head as recorded in Volume 6910, Page 601, Deed Records, Tarrant County, Texas and being more particularly described as follows; BEGINNING at a 2 inch iron pipe on the West bank of a branch at the southeast corner of that certain 11.32 acre tract of land conveyed to Arvel N. Tate and wife, Hazel Pearl Tate, by Deed dated March 13, 1954,and recorded in Vol. 2686, Page 125, Deed Records, Tarrant County, Texas, said point being 318.3 varas West of the Southeast corner of said Throop Survey, and also being in a current north city limit line of the City of Southlake; THENCE North with the East line of said Tate Tract, 115.65 feet to a point in the Southerly line of County Road No. 3080 (Dove Street); THENCE South 67 degrees,46 minutes East with said Southerly line of said road, 131.75 feet to a point on a curve to the left with a radius of 979.93 feet whose center bears North 19 degrees,28 minutes, 08 seconds East; THENCE southeasterly along said curve in Southerly line of road, 159.8 feet to the intersection of said Southerly line of road with an old fence line, an iron rod, said point also being in an existing north city limit line of the City of Southlake; THENCE South 80 degrees, 57 minutes, 30 seconds West with said old fence, 156.0 feet to an iron rod in concrete at fence corner at the Northeast corner of that certain 30.866 acre tract of land conveyed to the Veterans' Land Board by Deed recorded in Volume 3256, Page 93, Deed Records,Tarrant County. Texas; THENCE SOUTH 89 degrees, 45 minutes, 15 seconds West with fence in he North line of said Veterans' Land Board tract,and with the South line of said Throop Survey and the North line of the Heirs of Christopher Dart Survey,Abstract 2003, 12.2 feet to the PLACE OF BEGINNING, and containing 0.361 acres, more or less. \southlak\throop.sur EXHIBIT 'B' ANNEXATION TRACT y ---------- --------------- ----- _o Q � O N v11 j U OI2 3 7 4 Q 6 7A48 MA Q10 V I~ Z126 Ac 7A 7A I 1B2A � Q J 1"=200' �- 7A ~ 4 V 7A W � I Q 7A 7A 4A I 4811 y,Fs TRACT j 8 9 1B2aI T OOv46 sT 7A 74c i REFT � I { 5A ROOP SURVEY A-1510 RT SURVEY A-200J SOUThLAKE CITY LIMIT - 18 11 28 I 17 _ 1Ac I 10 IA ZC — — 16 — c_ 2 � � J I 15 J 35 Ac '( ! 1 Ac I Z 14 0 — — — — — — — — — -- — Z p 3 Y 13 Q 8 V 0 — _ City of Southlake,Texas s SCHEDULE FOR ANNEXATION OF PROPERTY .361 ACRES OF LAND ON WEST DOVE April 5, 1994 Resolution No. 94-15, calling two public hearings for annexation April 8, 1994 Publish notice of public hearing to be held on April 19, 1994. (to be published not more than 20 days before or less than 10 day of public hearing) April 19, 1994 First Public Hearing for Annexation. April 20, 1994 Publish notice of public hearing to be held on May 3, 1994. May 3, 1994 Second Public Hearing for Annexation. Approve Resolution, instructing the City Attorney to prepare an Ordinance, annexing property. May 17, 1994 First Reading of Ordinance annexing property into City of Southlake. Present Service Plan, attached to Ordinance. May 20, 1994 Publish Ordinance for public hearing to be held on second reading. June 7, 1994 Second Reading and Public Hearing of Ordinance, Annexing property into the City of Southlake. schedu1c\ann=tion\s1 THE NELSON CORP'ORA,.TION ERM=MnL PLANMO•]WORCM2W.•SURVEYING BY".14 MAR,CUS,P.B.,M.L& seGnus LArmSCaPE ARC9r1V9rt ik•CONSTRUC0001 MANACBMF?r FRESMV t 5999 SUMMU E DFM• JrtLr$t 202 naan XECU r-nre VXzCUIL rr vxc rar=txr DALIAS,TEXAS 7525E DMEC M Of n-COa as LArch23, 1.994 (QI4)36M6 s FAX(214)SWIM Honorable Mayor Gary Fickes VIA FAX City of Southlake 667 North Carroll Avenue Southlake, Texas 76092 RE: Timbedalm and Country Walk park dedicatiou fees Dear Mayor Fickes: Pursuant to our meeting of March 4, 1994, The Nelson Corporation, on behalf of Paramount Development, respectfully requests that the Southlake City Council consider allowing a land dedication from the Couxdxy Walk development in lieu of required park dedication fees for the above mo titoned projects. The actual dedication requirements and associated proposal is outlined as follows: 1. Timberlake will bave a total of approximately 435 single family lots of which 165 received preliminaty plat approval prior to the Park Land Ordinance being adopted, resulting in 270 lots subject to park dedication fees. Based on current Park Board criteria, the public park land dedication requirement will be 5.4 acres. 2. Assuming the Park Board grancs a 50 q credit to Timberlake for the existing developed private park land and amenities including playgrounds, jogging trail, tennis courts, swimming pool, pavilion, lake, fountains, etc. and an additional existing passive park space of approximately 33 acres, this reduces the required park land dedication to 2.7 acres. 3. The proposed plans for the Country Walk subdivision call for the development of approximately 55 single family lots, therefore requiring 1.1 acres of public park land dedication. 4. The proposed plans for the Country Walk subdivision includes approximately 5.3 acres of proposed park land, which would surpass the requirement of 3.8 acres for both Country Walk and Timberlake(Cowry Walk 1.1 acres and Timberlake 2.7 acres). 5_ Additionally, the developer agrees to install certain improvements on park property in conjunction with the construction of Country Walk, such improvement to become the property of the City of Southlake. These improveme= will include rough site grading, as well as beams, trees, and irrigation on the pa* perimeter abutting Continental Boulevard and Village Green Drive. In this regard, The Nelson Corporation requests that the Southlake City Council allow the developers to dedicate approximately 5.3 acres of park land within the Country Walk subdivision to satisfy all park land dedication and fee require mints of both Timberlake and Country Walk. Thank you for your time and consideration of the matter. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to can, Sincerely, THE NELSON CORPORATION / try xecutive Vice President rvos�ssouzoov,�c�cAs. City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM March 31, 1994 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Bob Whitehead, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Timber Lake Phase III and IV Developer Agreement Originally this Addition was submitted and approved as Phase III. At the City's request, Phase III was divided into Phases III and IV due to the fact that the Developer anticipated construction in phases. The plat remains the same and the number of lots in Phase III are the same number of lots in Phase III and Phase IV. The Developer Agreement for Timber Lake Addition Phases III and IV is attached. The Agreement contains the standard requirements for the provision of water, sewer, streets and drainage. Usual requirements relating to performance and payment bonds, maintenance bonds, inspection fees, and park fees are included in the Agreement. A few conditions are unique to these Phases, which resulted in revisions to our standard agreement. These items are discussed below. • Page 1, Section I. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS: has a change regarding the time frame on the completion of work. Normally Additions are completed within a two year time frame. Phase III will be completed within two years, but Phase IV will require an additional 12 months after Phase III is completed. • Page 9, Paragraph A, SEWER PRO-RATA: states that this Addition will pay their 0-2re of pro-rata toward the S-4 Sewer Line. The cost is determined to be $7,3 • Page 9, Paragraph B, OFF-SITE DRAINAGE: requires the Developer to contribute pro- rata toward the cost of replacing the box culvert at Continental Blvd. The cost is determined to be $5,338.43. • Page 10, Paragraph D, PARK FEES: states that the Developer agrees to dona 5.3 acre of parkland within the Country Walk Addition. Additionally, the Developer agrees to install certain improvements on park property in conjunction with the construction of Country Walk. On February 7, 1994 the Park Board unanimously approved the parkland dedication and recommends acceptance of the land to satisfy the parkland dedication and fee requirements of both Timber Lake Phases III and IV and Country Walk. Please note that even though Timber Lake Phase III was approved by the Park Board, the plat and number of lots in Phase III and Phase IV of this Addition remain the same. • Page 10, Paragraph F,PHASING CONSTRUCTION: indicates the construction time planned for the two phases. This section was requested by the Developer. A - t Curtis E. Hawk Timber Lake Devleper Agreement March 31, 1994 Page 2 Please place this on the April 5, 1994 City Council Meeting Agenda for council consideration and approval. Bob Whitehead Attachment: Developer Agreement wpfiles\memos\d=.lk TIMBER LAKE ADDITION PHASE III AND IV DEVELOPER AGREEMENT An Agreement between the City of Southlake, Texas, hereinafter referred to as the "City," and .................... ........ the undersigned Developer, hereinafter referred to as the "Developer," of the a tl ' ' ' to the Cityof Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas, hereinafter referred .................................................................. ................................................................. ................. ........ to as.the ..Addition," for the installation of certain community facilities located therein, and to provide city services thereto. It is understood by and between the parties that this Agreement ` < an d to lots contained within the ' " tr» dcas .: ... :_.::... is applicable to the '� ................................................................... the off-site improvements necessary to support the Addition. I. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS: A. It is agreed and understood by the parties hereto that the Developer shall employ a civil engineer licensed to practice in the State of Texas for the design and preparation of the plans and specifications for the construction of all facilities covered by this Agreement. B. Since the Developer is prepared to develop the Addition as rapidly as possible and is desirous of selling lots to builders and having residential building activity begin as quickly as possible and the City is desirous of having the subdivision completed as rapidly as possible, the City agrees to release 10% of the lots after installation of the water and sewer mains. Framing shall not commence until water quality is approved by the City and all appropriate Fire Code requirements are satisfied. The remaining building permits shall be released as soon as the streets are complete. The Developer recognizes that Certificates of Occupancy for residential dwellings will not be issued until the supporting public works infrastructure within the Addition has been accepted by the City, and this will serve as an incentive to the Developer to see that all remaining items are completed so that final acceptance can be obtained. C. The Developer will present to the City either a cash escrow, letters of credit, performance bond or payment bond acceptable to the City guaranteeing and agreeing to pay an amount equal to 100% of the value of the construction cost of all of the facilities to be constructed by the Developer, and providing for payment to the City of such amounts, up to the total remaining amounts required for the ......................... completion of the Addition if the Developer fails to complete the work .. :a...x..:.:. .<..1. . i ...t .. .%::. after. : the signing of this Agreement between the City and Developer. All bonds shall be issued by a Best-rated bonding company. All letters of credit must meet the Requirements for Irrevocable Letter of Credit attached hereto and incorporated herein. The value of the performance bond, letters of credit or cash escrow will reduce at a rate consistent with the amount of work that has been completed by the lda -- 3 Developer and accepted by the City. Performance and payment bond, letters of credit or cash escrow from the prime contractor(s) or other entity reasonably acceptable to City, hereinafter referred to as Contractor, will be acceptable in lieu of Developer's obligations specified above. D. The Developer agrees to furnish to the City maintenance bonds, letters of credit or cash escrow amounting to 20% of the cost of construction of underground utilities and 50% of the construction cost for paving. These maintenance bonds, letter of credit or cash escrow will be for a period of two (2) years and will be issued prior to the final City acceptance of the subdivision. The maintenance bonds, letters of credit or cash escrow will be supplied to the City by the contractors performing the work, and the City will be named as the beneficiary if the contractors fail to perform any required maintenance. E. Until the performance and payment bonds, letters of credit or cash escrow required in Paragraph C has been furnished as required, no approval of work on or in the Addition shall be given by City and no work shall be initiated on or in said Addition by Developer, save and except as provided above. F. It is further agreed and understood by the parties hereto that upon acceptance by City, title to all facilities and improvements mentioned hereinabove shall be vested in the City and Developer hereby relinquishes any right, title, or interest in and to said facilities or any part thereof. It is further understood and agreed that until the City accepts such improvements, City shall have no liability or responsibility in connection with any such facilities. Acceptance of the facilities shall occur at such time that City, through its City Manager or his duly authorized representative, provides Developer with a written acknowledgement that all facilities are complete, have been inspected and approved and are being accepted by the City. G. On all public facilities included in this agreement for which Developer awards his own construction contract, Developer agrees to the following procedure: 1. Developer agrees to pay the following: a. Inspection fees equal to three percent (3%) of the cost of the water, street, drainage and sanitary sewer facilities, on all facilities included in this agreement for which Developer awards his own construction contract, to be paid prior to construction of each phase and based on actual bid construction cost; b. Administrative processing fee equal to two percent (2%) of the cost of water, street, drainage and sanitary sewer facilities, on all facilities included in this agreement for which Developer awards 2 \,.� 10 A - �- his own construction contract, to be paid prior to construction of each phase and based on actual bid construction cost; C. Trench testing (95% Standard); d. The additional charge for Saturday and/or Sunday inspections;and e. Any charges for retesting as a result of failed tests. 2. The City agrees to bear the expense of: a. All nuclear density tests on the roadway subgrade (95% Standard); b. All gradation tests required to insure proper cement and/or lime stabilization; C. Technicians time for preparing concrete cylinders; and d. Concrete cylinder tests and concrete coring samples. The City can delay connection of buildings to service lines or water mains constructed under this Agreement until said water mains and service lines have been completed to the satisfaction of and accepted by the City. H. The Developer and any third parry, independent entity engaged in the construction of houses, hereinafter referred to as Builder will be responsible for mowing all grass and weeds and otherwise reasonably maintaining the aesthetics of all land and lots in said subdivision which have not been sold to third parties. After fifteen (15) days written notice, should the Developer or Builder fail in this responsibility, the City may contract for this service and bill the Developer or Builder for reasonable costs. Should such cost remain unpaid fcr 120 days after notice, the City can file a lien on such property so maintained. I. Any guarantee of payment instrument (Performance Bond, Letter of Credit, etc.) submitted by the Developer or Contractor on a form other than the one which has been previously approved by the City as "acceptable" shall be submitted to the City Attorney for the City and this Agreement shall not be considered in effect until such City Attorney has approved the instrument. Approval by the City shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. J. Any surety company through which a bond is written shall be a surety company duly authorized to do business in the State of Texas, provided that the City, through the City Manager, shall retain the right to reject any surety company as a surety for any work under this or any other Developer's Agreement within the 3 I C)A-� City of Southlake regardless of such company's authorization to do business in Texas. Approval by the City shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. II. FACILITIES: A. ON SITE WATER: The Developer hereby agrees to install water facilities to service lots as shown on the final plat of the Addition. Water facilities will be installed in accordance with plans and specifications to be prepared by the Developer's engineer and approved by the City. Further, the Developer agrees to complete this installation in accordance with Ordinance No. 170 and shall be responsible for all construction costs, materials and engineering. In the event that certain water lines are to be oversized because of City requirements, the City will reimburse the Developer for the oversize cost greater than the cost of an 8" line. Additionally, the City agrees to provide temporary water service at Developer's request and expense, for construction, testing and irrigation purposes only, to individual lots during the construction of homes, even though sanitary sewer service may not be available to the homes. B. DRAINAGE: Developer hereby agrees to construct the necessary drainage facilities within the Addition. These facilities shall be in accordance with the plans and specifications to be prepared by Developer's engineers, approved by the City Engineer, and made part of the final plat as approved by the City Council. The Developer hereby agrees to fully comply with all EPA requirements relating to the planning, permitting and management of storm water which may be in force at the time that development proposals are being presented for approval by the City. C. STREETS: 1. The street construction in the Addition shall conform to the requirements in Ordinance No. 217. Streets will be installed in accordance with plans and specifications to be prepared by the Developer's engineer and approved by the City Engineer. 2. The Developer will be responsible for: a) Installation and two year operation cost of street lights, which is payable to the City prior to final acceptance of the Addition; b) Installation of all street signs designating the names of the streets inside the subdivision, said signs to be of a type, size, color and design standard generally employed by the Developer and approved by the City in accordance with City ordinances: c) Installation of all regulatory signs recommended by the Manual on Uniform Traffic 4 10A. � Control Devices and as directed by the Director of Public Works. It is understood that Developer may put in signage having unique architectural features, however, should the signs be moved or destroyed by any means, the City is only responsible for replacement of standard signage. 3. All street improvements will be subject to inspection and approval by the City. No work will begin on any street included herein prior to complying with the requirements contained elsewhere in this Agreement. All water, sanitary sewer, and storm drainage utilities which are anticipated to be installed within the street or within the street right-of-way will be completed prior to the commencement of street construction on the specific section of street in which the utility improvements have been placed or for which they are programmed. It is understood by and between the Developer and the City that this requirement is aimed at substantial compliance with the majority of the pre-planned facilities. It is understood that in every construction project a decision later may be made to realign a line or service which may occur after construction has commenced. The Developer hereby agrees to advise the City Director of Public Works as quickly as possible when such a need has been identified and to work cooperatively with the City to make such utility change in a manner that will be least disruptive to street construction or stability. D. ON-SITE SANITARY SEWER FACILITIES: The Developer hereby agrees to install sanitary sewerage collection facilities to service lots as shown on the final plat of the Addition. Sanitary sewer facilities will be installed in accordance with the plans and specifications to be prepared by the Developer's engineer and approved by the City. Further, the Developer agrees to complete this installation in compliance with all applicable city ordinances, regulations and codes and shall be responsible for all construction costs, materials and engineering. E. EROSION CONTROL: During construction of the Addition and after the streets have been installed, the Developer agrees to keep the streets free from soil build-up. The Developer agrees to use soil control measures such as hay bales, silt screening, hydromulch, etc., to prevent soil erosion. It will be the Developer's responsibility to present to the Director of Public Works a soil control development plan that will be implemented for this subdivision. When, in the opinion of the Director of Public Works, there is sufficient soil build-up on the streets or other drainage areas and notification has been given to the Developer, the Developer will have seventy-two (72) hours to clear the soil from the streets or affected areas. If the Developer 5 ) Da-_7 does not remove the soil from the street within 72 hours, the City may cause the soil to be removed either by contract or City forces and place the soil within the Addition at the Developer's expense. All expenses must be paid to the City prior to acceptance of the Addition. F. AMENITIES: It is understood by and between the City and Developer that the Addition may incorporate a number of unique amenities and aesthetic improvements such as ponds, aesthetic lakes, unique landscaping, walls, and may incorporate specialty signage and accessory facilities. The Developer agrees to accept responsibility for the construction and maintenance of all such aesthetic or specialty item such as walls, vegetation, signage, landscaping, street furniture, pond and lake improvements until such responsibility is turned over to a homeowners association. G. USE OF PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY: It is understood by and between the City and Developer that the Developer may provide unique amenities within public right-of-way, such as landscaping, irrigation, lighting, etc., for the enhancement of the Addition. The Developer agrees to maintain these amenities until such responsibility is turned over to a homeowners association. The Developer and his successors and assigns understand that the City shall not be responsible for the replacement of these amenities under any circumstances and further agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the City from any and all damages, loss or liability of any kind whatsoever by reason of injury to property or third person occasioned by its use of the public right-of-way with regard to these improvements and the Developer shall, at his own cost and expense, defend and protect City against all such claims and demands. H. START OF CONSTRUCTION: Before the construction of the streets,and the water, sewer, or drainage facilities can begin, the following must take place: 1. Approved payment and performance bonds must be submitted to the City in the name of the City prior to the commencement of any work. 2. At least six (6) sets of construction plans stamped "Released for Construction" by the City Engineer must be submitted. 3. All fees required to be paid to the City. 6 f Oa-� 4. Developer's Agreement executed. 5. The Developer, or Contractor shall furnish to the City a policy of general liability insurance, naming the City as co-insured, prior to commencement of any work. 6. A pre-construction meeting between Developer and City is required. III. GENERAL PROVISIONS: A. Developer covenants and agrees to and does hereby fully indemnify, hold harmless and defend the City, its officers, agents, servants and employees, from all claims, suits or causes of action of any nature whatsoever, whether real or asserted, brought for or on account of any injuries or damages to persons or property, including death, resulting from or in any way connected with the agreement or the construction of the improvements or facilities described herein; which indemnity, shall terminate upon acceptance by the City of such improvements or facilities; and in addition, the Developer covenants to indemnify, hold harmless and defend the City, its officers, agents, servants and employees, from and against any and all claims, suits or causes of action of any nature whatsoever, brought for or on account of injuries or damages to persons or property, including death, resulting from any failure to properly safeguard the work, or on account of any act, intentional or otherwise, neglect or misconduct of the Developer, its contractors, subcontractors, agents, servants or employees, which indemnity, shall terminate upon acceptance by the City of such improvements or facilities. B. Venue of any action brought hereunder shall be in Fort Worth, Tarrant County, Texas. C. Approval by the City Engineer or other City employee of any plans, designs or specifications submitted by the Developer pursuant to this agreement shall not constitute or be deemed to be a release of the responsibility and liability of the Developer, his engineer, employees, officers or agents for the accuracy and competency of their design and specifications. Such approval shall not be deemed to be an assumption of such responsibility and liability by the City for any defect in the design and specifications prepared by the consulting engineer, his officers, agents, servants or employees, it being the intent of the parties that approval by the City Engineer signifies the City's approval on only the general design concept of the improvements to be constructed. In this connection, the Developer shall for a period of two (2) years after the acceptance by the City of Southlake of the completed construction project, indemnify and hold harmless the City, its officers, agents, servants and employees, from any loss, damage, liability or expense on account of damage to property and injuries, including death, to any 7 C) r'9 and all persons which may arise out of any defect, deficiency or negligence of the engineer's designs and specifications incorporated into any improvements constructed in accordance therewith, and the Developer shall defend at his own expense any suits or other proceedings brought against the City, its officers, agents, servants or employees, or any of them, on account thereof, to pay all expenses and satisfy all judgement which may be incurred by or rendered against them or any of them in connection with herewith. D. This agreement or any part thereof or any interest herein, shall not be assigned by the Developer without the express :written consent of the City Manager, which shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. E. On all facilities included in this agreement for which the Developer awards his own construction contract, the Developer agrees to employ a construction contractor who is approved by the City, and whose approval shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed, said contractor to meet City and statutory requirements for being insured, licensed and bonded to do work in public streets and to be qualified in all respects to bid on public streets and to be qualified in all respects to bid on public projects of a similar nature. F. Work performed under the agreement shall be completed within two (2) years from the date thereof. In the event the work is not completed within the two (2) year period, the City may, at its election, draw on the performance bond, letter of credit or other security provided by Developer and complete such work at Developer's expense; provided, however, that if the construction under this agreement shall have started within the two (2) year period, the City may agree to renew the agreement with such renewed agreement to be in compliance with the City policies in effect at that time. G. The City is an exempt organization under Section 151,309, Tax Code, and the facilities constructed under this Agreement will be dedicated to public use and accepted by the City upon acknowledgement by the City of completion under Paragraph I.F. 1. The purchase of tangible personal property, other than machinery or equipment and its accessories, repair, and replacement parts, for use in the performance of this Agreement is, therefore, exempt from taxation under Chapter 151, Tax code, if the tangible property is: a. necessary and essential for the performance of the Agreement; and b. completely consumed at the job site. 8 0A• 10 2. The purchase of a taxable service for use in the performance of this Agreement is exempt if the service is performed at the job site and if: a. this Agreement expressly requires the specific service to be provided or purchased by the person performing the Agreement; or b. the service is integral to the performance of the Agreement. IV. OTHER ISSUES: A. SEWER PRO-RAT ..... ....... . ............ VP -A- ,::;......... ... la.. ......................... ..................... ...... . ....11.. ............ T 1.11 . -P P.P.P i.P... ................ in i i ..........U ...... ............................... .. ........... ..... .................... ... .. 9*'*-.iii�*".*.O..'....W..i...IiI X-11,10"i'll".., 1 -.1.9 ... ....... ..... WPM PS-.*010.1.10-ii...Vie:: :: ::;M-1M. oii . ...................... ..... ................. E .............. ..W. 0.0 . ............. ...4 ....... ............. ......... -R)Pe 3 ......................i:: ...... ......... tv f C. OFF-SITE WATER: Water facilities will be installed in accordance with plans and specifications to be prepared by the Developer's engineer and approved by the City. Further, the Developer agrees to complete this installation in accordance with Ordinance No. 170 and shall be responsible for all construction costs, materials and engineering. In the event that certain water lines are to be oversized because of City requirements, the City will reimburse the Developer for the oversize cost. ................ ............ ...............X......... .. . . 9 :::::...?.::.is?.:.i.::.::.:::.::.i::..;..:. ,:.%::.::.;':...:::.i::i".:.:':.:>:::::::::::.::.;'::::..;-:?;::.i.::.::.i•::::.i":::.:;..:.:::. .::.. ::;....... .::;a><.::>>?. ii:.>:.i:.::.:...............i'.:.i: -KI :•.if:.^:h•:6:•iii:-iiii:'iiiii:tiiiiiiiiiiiiiii::•iiiiii:'iiiiiii::::•:.}•.:.:.}•.}•:.}•::-x-.::.i::•iii::::.}:w.••.iii::•:ii'.iii:::•}•:.}•:.}'::•.:..:.:.:is••:••.:ii"' ii':...••••:•:•:...:'.ii. .:.. ..}i}}i..::.. c.I�j?:{' 'vii}iI.i. .. iiii: ?::j/{ :• - :::i ::::::Ni•R }}:1K-�� ::::iV.i:•::'r, ....i.i::::::.i. .....R`}::}.�.: .X^.^.4i :........:ii:..!`:- }(j�:��/..:.. .�:: v:Ki!►I .i..... ..........::...... ...... iiiiii}:???i:?iii}:i ii:is ii::::::::::::::. :::::::::::::::::::::::::•::: v:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::•.}.'.iY?�ii:;:.+iii};::::•}}}};:niii---w:::::.�...::�:::.iiiiii;,:•i:•i:^:v:•iii%"Uti4i:0i:4:4:w:::::::::::w-w:::. •..�:w:n�::::: :::.i'::::::.i':.i'.i ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::. .:::: .::::::::::::..:::::::::::::::::::.::::::::::::::::: .::.:::.::.::: : :.�::: ::. ':::.i:.i:.i:.i::.is.:.:?.>::.iii::.::.::::::<:...: ..........:................................................................................... E. TREE PRESERVATION ORDINANCE: All construction activities shall meet the requirements of the Tree Preservation Ordinance 585. i..r... `< > . •i:•i:??.i i:::::::::4'•:.... ...... �....v........::ti..??4ii:xiiii::::::::n+ v,wryii::-i}i:-i%??iii::n::................................................:::.....:..:::.:.::::..�: "'f''tititiS:•Y::•: .Y:w:::?w:::•i:•i}i'r'i:•iv:;iiiiiiii�i '• ii%-i:•i:•i:vii}ii{i'{iii:;i:^:?4:4ii+:0ii: SIGNED AND EFFECTIVE on the date last set forth below. DEVELOPER: By: Title: Date: CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS By: Gary Fickes, Mayor ATTEST: Sandra LeGrand, City Secretary Date: c:I wpfiles 1 devagree I timber.lk3 10 REQUIREMENTS FOR IRREVOCABLE LETTER OF CREDIT 1. The Letter of Credit (L of C) must have a duration of at least one year. 2. The L of C may be substituted for utility security deposits exceeding $10,000.00. The City reserves the right to specify the face amount of the letter of credit. 3. The L of C must be issued by an FDIC insured bank in a form acceptable to the City of Southlake. The City reserves the right to approve/disapprove the bank issuing the Letter of Credit. 4. The L of C must be issued by a bank that has a minimum capital ratio of six (6%) percent, and has been profitable for each of the last two consecutive years. 5. The customer must provide the City with supporting financial information on the bank to allow the City to ascertain requirements are met. Suitable financial information would be the previous two (2) years December 31 Call Reports submitted to the FDIC and audited financial statements. 6. Partial drawings against L of C must be permitted. 7. The City must be able to draft on sight with proof of amount owed. 8. The customer pays any and all fees associated with obtaining L of C. 9. Expiring letter of credit must be replaced by substitute letters of credit at least 30 days prior to the expiration date on the L of C held by the City. 11 Page is too large to OCR. Page is too large to OCR.