Item 7E - Water Master Plan r
Item 7E
CITY OF
SOUT AKA • 44
ohm
WA
M .,L, '.TER PLAN
An dement o the Southlake Comprehensive Plan
tj
M in
Adopted by the:Southlake City Council
Ordinance No. 1032A
April ##, 2026 f
u.
-L. ti YYC+
t
t r;
w
i
i
�4
✓VA, EF, MASTER PLAN
fi
low
c , > '
C
SOUTHLAKE
Comprehensive Plan
City of Southlake City Council
Mayor Shawn McCaskill
Mayor Pro Tem Randy Williams
Deputy Mayor Pro Tem Kathy ey
Councilmember Place 2 Rand bins
Councilmember Place 3 Fra s S li
Councilmember Place 4 in Reyno
Councilmember Place uc Taggart
Planning & Zoning Comm issio idor Planning Committee
Chair Daniel Kubiak Kathy Talley - City Council
Vice Chair Mike Forman Randy Robbins - City Council
Commissioner Gina Cannov Austin Reynolds - City Council
Commissioner David Cunni am Frances Scharli - City Council
Commissioner Michael Spr r Daniel Kubiak - Planning & Zoning
Commissioner Stacy co Michael Springer - Planning & Zoning
Commissioner L David Cunningham - Planning & Zoning
Gina Cannova - Planning & Zoning
Mike Forman - Planning & Zoning
Magdalena Battles - Parks Board
Chad Patton - Ex-Officio
City of Southlake Staff
City Manager Alison D. Ortowski
Assistant City Manager James Brandon
Assistant City Manager Stacey Black
Chief Financial Officer Sharen Jackson
Interim Director of Public Works Lauren LaNeave
City Engineer Jeff Ginn
Director of Economic Development & Tourism Daniel Cortez
Director of Planning and Development Services Dennis Killough
Deputy Director of Planning and Development Services Jenny Crosby
Assistant to the Director Ryan Firestone
Senior GIS Analyst Jesus Gabriel
The Water Master Plan is Southlake's long-ran ramewo r managing, operating, and
reinvesting in the City's water infrastructure as th mm nity ap aches buildout. The plan's
findings, projections, system performance insights, n eve are derived from the water system
modeling study conducted by Freese and Nichols in . Together, this work transitions the City
from a primarily expansion-focused approac ne ce ed on reliability, resiliency, regulatory
compliance, and lifecycle reinvestment provi di ion for day-to-day decision-making,
long-term budgeting, and capital programme s in excellent service for residents and
businesses.
Like the City's other supporting er p tions as a "knowledge base" that explains how
Southlake manages its water syst ay a how the City will guide long-term, data-driven
decisions in the years ahe I s Comprehensive Plan is the community's roadmap for
growth, investment, and lity o e, rdinating policies across land use, mobility, parks and
open space, economic d lopment, nd public facilities. The Water Master Plan implements that
vision by translating broa mmu y goals into practical utility policies, service expectations,
and prioritized investment pr .c at protect public health and support the community's high
standards for day-to-day living.
A core focus of the plan is strengthening how the City plans, invests, and communicates about
infrastructure stewardship through asset management. The plan establishes measurable Levels
of Service (LOS) and provides the framework to develop Southlake's first comprehensive
Water Infrastructure Asset Management Plan, enabling risk-based prioritization of maintenance,
rehabilitation, and replacement across the system. Water conservation is also addressed as
both a state-required planning component and a practical strategy to reduce peak demand,
improve system efficiency, and manage long-term costs together supporting dependable
service, responsible stewardship, and a long-term investment program aligned with community
expectations.
WATER MASTER PLAN
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE CHAPTER
6 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
12 CHAPTER 2: WATER SYSTEM OVERVIEW
18 CHAPTER 3: WATER DEMANDS
24 CHAPTER 4: HYDRAULIC WATER M EL UPDATE
28 CHAPTER 5: SYSTEM ANALYST PERF MANCE
34 CHAPTER 6: WATER INFRAS URE ASSET MANAGEMENT
40 CHAPTER 7: WATER CO N
46 CHAPTER 8: GR DE LOPMENT, AND SYSTEM
PROTECTION
50 CHAPTE . C TY ENGAGEMENT, PARTNERSHIPS, AND
FUNDIN
56 CHAPTER 10: N ADOPTION & PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT
60 WATER MASTER PLAN POLICY STATEMENTS SUMMARY
62 GLOSSARY OF TERMS
66 APPENDIX A: FREESE AND NICHOLS WATER
INFRASTRUCTURE MODELING STUDY - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
ORDINANCE
�0 lip
luwr �
•---- �_��____a----•— +,
•- _iI Will
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
Chapter 1 establishes the context for South lake's er Ma r Plan, why the plan is needed,
how the water system has evolved, and how the City use this to guide decisions as
the community approaches buildout. It introduces shif om )107ent
arily growth-driven period
of infrastructure expansion to an era defined by ship: maintaining dependable service,
managing risk, and reinvesting in critical assets to pro public health, safety, and quality of life.
This chapter also frames the Water Master a p ical "knowledge base" that translates
technical evaluation into policy direction, ser e t ns, and an implementation path that
supports consistent day-to-day operati s and ran capital planning.
The chapter also explains how t at Mast Plan fits within Southlake's broader planning
and governance structure. As a o nt of the Comprehensive Plan, it aligns water
infrastructure decisions with e unity's long-range land use assumptions, investment
priorities, and service stand , . e coordinating with the City's wastewater and stormwater
planning efforts. It furthe nnects e p to the Strategic Management System by emphasizing
measurable performance, nsparen rioritization, and budget alignment ensuring water system
needs are integrated into rtm al work planning, the Capital Improvements Program, and
annual funding decisions.
BACKGROUND
Over the last several decades, Southlake has transformed from a rural community dependent on
private water wells into a master-planned, nationally recognized city supported by a modern,
complex water infrastructure system. Incorporated in 1956, Southlake initially relied on four wells
that offered limited capacity and inconsistent water quality, constraints that ultimately drove the
City to pursue a more sustainable, reliable supply. By the mid-1980s, Southlake secured a long-
term wholesale water agreement with the City of Fort Worth, which remains the City's sole water
provider today.
Through sustained investment in storage, pumping, and distribution infrastructure, Southlake has
built a system capable of serving current needs and supporting projected buildout conditions.
Today, the water system includes more than 300 miles of water lines, multiple storage facilities, two
major pump stations, and more than 11,000 water connections. As the community nears buildout,
the City's priorities continue to evolve shifting from system expansion to long-term stewardship,
WATER MASTER PLAN
WHAT WE MANAGE
w
313 + O
3, 000 +
MILES OF WATER LINE FIRE HYDRANTS
WATER1194500 + 7
SERVICE WATER STORAGE
reinvestment, and resilience. The Water Maste rovi he framework to maintain dependable
service, manage risk, and ensure the system c in e6t community expectations over time.
A central implementation feature of er ter Plan is the development and use of a Water
Infrastructure Asset Management P led the lic Works and Finance Departments. The Asset
Management Plan will provide the ormation and tools needed to plan investments
strategically and maintain inf tru e in a timely and cost-efficient manner. Key elements
include establishing an inv I ri assets, evaluating condition and performance, applying
a conservative long-ran financi pp ch to maintenance and renewal, and strengthening
Supervisory Control an to Acq sition (SCADA) monitoring of critical assets. The Water
Infrastructure Asset Manage t PI is described in more detail in Chapter 6.
PREVIOUS WATER MASTER PL S
Southlake has a long history of deliberate water system planning to guide its transition from a
rural community into a fully built-out city. The 2012 Water System Master Plan represented one
of the City's most comprehensive evaluations of water supply, pumping, storage, and distribution
needs in the context of anticipated growth. It recommended phased improvements designed to
meet projected needs through 2025, including: adding elevated storage for operational and fire
protection reserves; expanding pump station capacity at Pearson Road and T.W. King to meet peak
demand and maintain firm capacity; strategically looping water mains to improve circulation and
redundancy; and developing a second supply line from Fort Worth to reduce reliance on a single
connection and improve resiliency. Many of these recommendations were implemented in the years
following adoption, strengthening system reliability and capacity.
The 2025 Water System Modeling Analysis built upon earlier planning and studies and confirmed that
Southlake's long-term emphasis is increasingly defined by optimization and operational excellence.
That analysis highlighted the need to maintain firm pumping capacity in both pressure planes at or
above Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) standards even under peak demand or
major equipment outages; to exceed minimum TCEQ elevated storage requirements by adopting a
stronger City standard;to address operational challenges such as water age in elevated tanks through
improved mixing and optimized turnover; to improve seasonal peak demand management through
conservation, education, and operational adjustments; to strengthen supply resiliency through
evaluation of additional emergency interties and continued coordination with Fort Worth during
regional peak conditions; and to continue phased replacement of aging mains and appurtenances
to reduce breaks, support water quality, and manage lifecycle cost.
This Plan builds on that technical foundation while expanding the City's approach into a broader,
policy-driven framework. It maintains rigorous system evaluation and regulatory compliance
focus, while elevating strategic priorities such as asset lifecycle management, risk-based capital
prioritization, financial stewardship, conservation, sustainability, and alignment with the City's
Strategic Management System and Comprehensive Plan. Southlake's water infrastructure has
played a central role in the City's success as a premier community in which to live, work, shop, and
recreate. This plan provides the framework to continue that leg by meeting current needs while
anticipating the needs of the future.
SCOPE AND GOALS
The Water Master Plan serves as the City of Sout e's Wding po cy document for long-term
management, operation, and reinvestment of its e frastructure system. It establishes a
consistent framework for decision-making that prioritiz ervice reliability, public safety, regulatory
compliance, and fiscal stewardship as Southl roa buildout. The plan addresses the full
scope of system management from defining se
e at ns and evaluating system performance
to establishing an approach for asset many t d long-range capital programming so
investments are timely, coordinated, ne ith community standards.
Key outcomes of the plan includ tab ' surable Levels of Service (LOS), providing the
framework for Southlake's first comp sive ater Infrastructure Asset Management Plan,aligning
capital investments with sy .or and identifying metrics to evaluate performance over
time. Together, these ell e nts tra to hnical findings and operational needs into actionable
policy direction that info day-to- y decisions and long-term budgeting.
To achieve these objectives, t is organized around the following goals:
1. Data-Driven - Establish d fined LOS measures and initiate the development of an Asset
Management Plan to support reliable, safe, and well-maintained service.
2. Public Safety - Maintain infrastructure consistent with the Asset Management Plan, meeting
or exceeding LOS standards and ensuring adequate supply and pressure for fire suppression
and emergency needs.
3. Federal and State Requirements - Maintain compliance with applicable TCEQ and EPA
requirements related to water quality, conservation, emergency preparedness, and system
performance.
4. Efficient and Effective - Improve sustainability, resilience, and energy efficiency to reduce
costs, minimize environmental impacts, and use public funds responsibly.
5. Lifecycle Budgeting and Management - Apply a "whole-of-life" approach, evaluating cost
and performance from design through replacement, embedded within asset prioritization.
6. Capital Improvement Programming - Prioritize renewal of critical assets through the CIP
based on risk, public safety, LOS goals, and coordination opportunities.
7. Service-Focused - Base renewal and reinvestment decisions on current system performance
8 WATER MASTER PLAN I SOUTHLAKE COMPREHENSIVE
WATER MASTER PLAN
and LOS expectations, recognizing system interdependencies.
8. Cost/Benefit Analysis - Evaluate alternatives for new and replacement projects by balancing
service levels, risk, lifecycle cost, and community impacts.
9. Transparent and Customer-Focused - Share infrastructure priorities and progress through
accessible reporting and digital tools as the Asset Management Plan is implemented.
10. Development Impact Assessment - Require development to demonstrate adequate supply,
capacity, and fire flow prior to approval, incorporating necessary improvements into
agreements and plan review.
11. Future Land Use Alignment - Schedule and fund improvements through the CIP to meet
projected demand based on the City's Land Use Plan and anticipated growth patterns.
These goals establish a performance-based foundation that can adapt to evolving technologies,
changing regulations, and community expectations while maintaining excellent service over time.
RELATIONSHIP TO THE STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
City of So a Strategy Map
The mission of the City o uthlake is t vide municipal services that support
the highest quality o for our resident upportive environment for local
INTEGRITY business nd uni and specia experiences for visitors.
INNOVATION
TEAMWORK We of on Our Focus Areas
EXCELLENCE
91 ACCOUNTABILITY U041-
afety Infrastructure& Partnerships& Performance
ecurit Development Volunteerism Management&
Service Delivery
We Serve
- --
O7��u�r I
The P7romote
�ffiers • • Learning
Growth
we-0-114-6- we-0--p e- Mal#(--p 6- we,0--p P-
C1 Delivering outstanding F1 Safeguarding the 131 Achieving strong L1 Defining and managing
customer experiences public trust through outcomes through a professional workplace
through innovation, a commitment to continual evaluation culture that supports
passion,and a strong thoughtful planning and and pursuit of better City values and promotes
culture. responsible,conservative practices that improve a positive employee
C2 Enhancing the sense financial management. core business operations. experience.
of community by F2 Investing to provide& F,7 Collaborating with select L2 Fostering positive
proactively creating maintain high quality partners to implement employee engagement.
opportunities for public assets. service solutions L3 Attracting,developing&
community partnerships, B3 Maintaining an retaining a talented and
volunteer involvement, environment of motivated workforce
and citizen engagement. future readiness by for lasting world-class
understanding and performance.
acting upon the forces,
trends,and coming
challenges affecting
services.
C=Customer Objectives F=Financial Objectives B=Business Objectives L=Learning&Growth Objectives
Southlake's Strategic Management System (SMS) aligns long-term vision, strategic priorities, and
daily operations through a unified framework that connects policy direction to budgets, work plans,
ORDINANCE NO. 1032A I ADOPTED
and measurable outcomes. It integrates the City's Strategy Map, departmental business plans, the
Capital Improvements Program (CIP), and the Annual Budget so that initiatives support adopted
strategic focus areas such as Safety & Security, Infrastructure & Development, Partnerships &
Volunteerism, and Performance Management & Service Delivery.
Within this framework, the Water Master Plan serves as a key management tool that advances
multiple strategic focus areas by establishing policies, service expectations, and investment
priorities for water infrastructure. Recommended LOS standards, risk-based prioritization methods,
and asset lifecycle management practices provide the basis for aligning water system needs with
departmental planning, budgeting, and CIP decision-making. This connection enables coordinated
delivery across departments, improves transparency in resource allocation, and supports consistent
evaluation of trade-offs as needs and funding conditions evolve.
The SMS also emphasizes accountability and performance measurement. The Water Master Plan
supports that approach by identifying measurable metrics such as annual inspection targets, water
loss reduction goals, and capital delivery progress that can be cked and reported through the
City's existing performance practices. In this way, the plan func s not as a static document, but as
an active framework that supports strategic, financially sus le, and measurable infrastructure
stewardship.
RELATIONSHIP TO THE CITIZEN SATISFACTION S EY
Southlake's Citizen Satisfaction Survey provides an im nt community lens for the Water Master
Plan because resident priorities and percep help ine what "excellent service" means in
practice. Reliable water service is often most e lic when it is disrupted through water
main breaks, pressure concerns, boil water n 'ce ruction impacts, or perceived changes
in taste, odor, or clarity. Survey fe re d to infrastructure condition, responsiveness,
neighborhood impacts,communicat an vera onfidence in City services helps staff understand
where expectations are being met d w r ements in performance, coordination, or public
information may be needed. This pl t mmunity input as a complementary form of data
alongside system modelingpa er al knowledge, ensuring that technical recommendations
remain grounded in real c mer er e.
The survey also reinforces value o ransparency and predictability in infrastructure stewardship.
Residents consistently want n tand how the City prioritizes projects, why certain areas are
being addressed first, and wha expect during construction or service interruptions. By linking
reinvestment decisions to measurable Levels of Service, risk-based asset management, and clear
reporting, the Water Master Plan supports improvements that are directly tied to satisfaction drivers
such as service reliability, timely maintenance, clear communication, and responsible use of public
funds. In this way, the Citizen Satisfaction Survey informs not only what the City invests in, but how
the City communicates progress and maintains trust as water infrastructure is renewed over time.
RELATIONSHIP TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
Southlake's Comprehensive Plan is the City's long-range policy roadmap for growth, investment,
and quality of life. Adopted by ordinance and updated regularly, it coordinates major elements
including Land Use, Mobility, Parks and Open Space, Sustainability, Economic Development, and
Public Facilities to advance a unified community vision shaped by public engagement and the City's
adopted Vision, Goals, and Objectives.
The Water Master Plan is the Comprehensive Plan's functional water element. It translates citywide
priorities into specific policies, service expectations, and implementation practices that ensure
10 WATER MASTER PLAN I SOUTHILAKECOMPREHENSIVE
WATER MASTER PLAN
the water system supports both current needs and
future land use scenarios. As Southlake nears buildout,
the plan's emphasis appropriately shifts from expansion
to sustaining service excellence through reinvestment,
replacement of aging infrastructure, improved resiliency,
A and disciplined long-range planning that protects public
health and safety.
/A\ This alignment is essential because water planning
g p g
00 is inseparable from other community priorities. Land
use patterns influence demand and where capacity
must be maintained. Mobility and street projects
create opportunities to coordinate utility work and
reduce repeated disruptions. Sustainability goals shape
SOUTHLAKE conservation and efficiency initiatives. By connecting
asset management, r -based capital planning, and
Comprehensive Plan performance expe ions to Southlake's growth
assumptions and tegic objectives, the City can
prioritize invest nts the right locations and at the
right time st gthenin e long-term foundation for
quality of li
ORDINANCE NO. . ADOPTED
SOUTH r
4 - y
3�
Southlake's water system is a municipally own and op ed utility that provides safe,
reliable drinking water to a community of more than 1 0 c stomer nnections. All treated water
is purchased from the City of Fort Worth and deliver hro a distribution network that Southlake
maintains and manages. While the City does not o its own water treatment facilities, its
responsibilities are significant maintaining co . tent w pressure, providing adequate storage
for daily operations and emergency needs, o ffi t pumping systems, protecting water
quality throughout the network, and maintain r cy so service can be sustained during
maintenance activities and unexpecte ts.
As Southlake approaches build the em focus continues to shift from expansion to
optimization, resiliency, and asset r is chapter provides a clear, shared understanding
of the system's major com s how they work together to meet service expectations.
It establishes the baseli oun on r later chapters that evaluate performance through
modeling, define Levels Service, d c nnect long-term reinvestment priorities to funding and
implementation strategies.
PRESSURE ZONES
Southlake's distribution system is divided into two primary pressure zones—the High-Pressure
Plane (HPP) and the Low-Pressure Plane (LPP)—to account for varying topography and maintain
consistent service across the community. The HPP serves higher-elevation areas, largely in
the western portion of the city, with pressures maintained by the Florence Elevated Storage
Tank with an overflow elevation of approximately 860 feet. The LPP serves the remainder of
the city, primarily in central and eastern areas, with pressures maintained by the Bicentennial,
Dove, and Miron Elevated Storage Tanks, each with an overflow elevation of about 801 feet.
Maintaining two pressure planes is essential for meeting Texas Commission on Environmental
Quality (TCEQ) minimum pressure standards-35 psi under normal conditions and 20 psi during
firefighting—and for protecting infrastructure from excessive pressures in lower elevation areas.
Five strategically located Pressure Reducing Valve (PRV) stations connect the two zones and
allow controlled transfers when needed to support firefighting, supplement supply during peak
demand, or maintain service during maintenance or emergency events. Effective pressure plane
management relies on regular PRV calibration, real-time pressure monitoring through SCADA, and
12 WATER MASTER PLAN I SOUTHLAKE COMPREHENSIVE
WATER MASTER PLAN
Elevation(ft)
Ta LEGEND
1 ylor Road pS Pump Station
900 1�Transmission Ground Storage Tank
Main Flow Direction Volume
Florence HI Elevated
Elevation
Aka Vista pressure Volume Elevated Storage Tank
860 Transmission Lowest Ground Elevation
850 Main
1.5 MG ® Pressure Reducing Valve Water Sapply Source
Bicentennial
800 801 Dove Park Miran
1.5 MG 1.5 MG 1.5 MG
750
740
Multiple Locations
700 700
HighPearso n
650 Pressure Plane PS
5 MG 5 MG Low
600 598 essure Plane
Alta Vista PS
(Shared with
City of Keller)
550
542
Cityof Fort TW K
Worth 5 MG PS
500
Figure 2-1: Existing ys Schematic
periodic model updates that reflec Id c diti . The most recent Water Master Plan identified
upgrading PRV monitoring and st th ional protocols for zone transfers as important
resiliency strategies.
WATER MAINS
8-inch 0.05%
Southlake's distribution n ork 2-inch oL 0.81%
includes over 300 miles f 36-inch 0.04%
water mains, ranging from Iarg 30-inch 2.05%
diameter transmission mains to 24-inch it 0.70%20-inch 3.21%
smaller distribution lines serving 18-inch 1 0.14%
neighborhoods and commercial 16-inch 1 0.26%
areas. Large transmission mains, 14-inch 0.051/o
12-inch 20.80%
up to 48 inches in diameter, 10-inch 0.06%
move water between supply 8-inch 48.751/.
connections, pump stations, and 6-inch mop= 22.08°%
4-inch a 0.55%
storage facilities. Smaller mains 3-inch 0.11%
provide localized delivery to 2-inch 0.32%
customers and maintain circulation 1.5-inch 0.04%
throughout the system. 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50% 55%
Total Length
A variety of pipe materials are Figure 2-2: Water Line Diameter by Percent Total Length
in service, including ductile iron,
PVC, reinforced conrcrete, and older metallic pipes. Older metallic mains are a key focus for renewal
due to higher failure rates and increased corrosion risk. Southlake's system also reflects a strong
emphasis on looping interconnecting mains to create multiple flow paths which improves flexibility,
reduces stagnation, supports water quality, and maintains service during planned shutdowns or
unexpected breaks. The condition and layout of the water main network directly influence both
reliability and water quality outcomes, which is why the City's long-term approach increasingly
emphasizes proactive renewal based on age, material, break history, and criticality.
SUPPLY CONNECTIONS
Southlake's treated water is supplied entirely by the City of Fort Worth through two primary
wholesale connections:
Alta Vista Connection — delivers up to approximately 10 MGD via 30-inch and 36-inch mains
to the Pearson Road Pump Station.
Caylor Tank Connection — delivers up to approximately 20 MGD via a 42-inch main to
Pearson Road and a 30-inch branch to the T.W. King Pump Station.
Together, these connections provide a contracted firm supply c city of roughly 30 MGD, sufficient
for current demands and projected buildout needs under al operating conditions with both
connections available. As with most wholesale arrangeme d ry conditions can be influenced
by regional drought, seasonal peaks, or maintenanc ithin th pplier's system. Maintaining
strong coordination with Fort Worth is therefore esse I to nsure t delivery pressures and flow
rates support Southlake's operational needs. The t r nt plan recommends periodic supply
capacity evaluation, joint planning for peak-demand ios, and improved integration of supply
monitoring into SCADA for real-time awarene
EMERGENCY INTERCONNECTIONS
To provide redundancy in the even a rup to its primary supply, Southlake maintains an
8-inch emergency intertie with th ity of evi . While limited in capacity, this connection can
provide partial service during an o infrastructure failure. Emergency interties are an
important resiliency feature provide a safeguard against unexpected disruptions and
se e
support continuity of esse r
Best practice includes re r valy exercising, periodic flow testing to verify capacity, and
maintaining clear operational o with the neighboring utility.The most recent plan recommends
evaluating the benefits of upsizi e
existing intertie and adding a second Pressre RatedCapacity
intertie to improve redundancy andPlane Address
strengthen emergency preparedness. ••
HSP-1 Low 3,474 5.00 362
PUMP STATIONS HSP-2 Low 3200 W. 3,474 5.00 362
Southlake
HSP-3 Low Blvd. 3,474 5.00 362
Southlake operates two major pump HSP-4 Low 3,474 5.00 362
stations, Pearson Road and T.W.
King, to move water from ground LPP Total Capacity 13,89620.00
storage into the distribution system •• Firm Capacity • ••
and maintain pressure in each zone. HSP-5 High 3200 W. 2,250 3.24 250
HSP-6 High Southlake 2,250 3.24 250
Pearson Road Pump Station serves HSP-7 High Blvd. 2,250 3.24 250
both the High- and Low-Pressure HPP Total Capacity 6,750 •
Planes and is supported by two 5.0 HPP Firm Capacity 4,500 6.48
MG ground storage tanks. It functions Figure 2-3:Pearson Pump Station Capacity
14 WATER MASTER PLAN I SOUTHLAKE COMPREHENSIVE
WATER MASTER PLAN
as the City's primary pumping facility Rated Capacity
and a central hub for water movement. pump Pressure Address
..
Plane
..
T.W. King Pump Station serves the HSP-1 Low 3,474 5.00 362
Low-Pressure Plane and is supported HSP-2 Low 3655 T.W.
by a single 5.0 MG ground storage King Road 3,474 5.00 362
tank, with space reserved for a second HSP-3 Low 3,474 5.00 362
tank in the future. Total Capacity 10,422 ••
Firm Capacity 6,948 10.00
Both pump stations meet or exceed Figure 2-4: T.W. Pump Station Capacity
TCEQ firm pumping capacity
requirements, which require the
system to meet maximum day demand with the largest pump out of service. Ongoing focus areas
include maintaining pump efficiency, optimizing pump sequencing to reduce energy costs, and
ensuring compliance with backup power expectations at critical facilities. Continued SCADA
integration supports remote operation, condition monitoring, d performance tracking, which
strengthens reliability and improves operational decision-ma
STORAGE TANKS
Southlake's storage system includes elevated and nd orage fa lities that work together to
maintain pressure, balance daily fluctuations, and pr e erves for firefighting and emergencies.
Elevated Storage Tanks (ESTs): Four tanks wi ombi capacity of approximately 6.0 MG. The
Florence EST serves the High-Pressure Plane, h nt nial, Dove, and Miron serve the Low-
Pressure Plane.
Bic7entenn ark 0 N. White Chapel Blvd. 1.5
Low Dove Road 2300 N. White Chapel Blvd. 1.5
Low
Low Mir 320 Miron Dr. 1.5
High Lffence Ro 635 Brewer Rd. 1.5
F" a 2-5:Elevated Storage Tanks
Ground Storage Tanks (GSTs): Three tanks with a combined capacity of 15.0 MG-10.0 MG at Pearson
Road and 5.0 MG at T.W. King.
CapacityPressure Plane Facility Name Physical Address Storage
Low T.W. King Rd. 13655 T.W. King Rd. 1 5.0
Low/High Pearson Road 1 & 2 13200 W. Southlake Blvd. 10.0
Total -. Capacity 15.0
Figure 2-6: Ground Storage Tanks
Southlake's elevated storage policy exceeds the TCEQ minimum requirement of 100 gallons
per connection by maintaining approximately 200 gallons per connection. This higher standard
strengthens operational flexibility and fire protection capability. Priorities for long-term stewardship
include routine inspection, protective coating maintenance, mixing systems to manage water
age, and operational coordination that maintains reserves during high-demand and emergency
conditions.
PRESSURE REDUCING VALVE STATIONS
Five PRV stations connect the High- and Low-Pressure Planes, allowing Southlake to balance
pressures and transfer water between zones when needed. These valves provide operational
flexibility by keeping pressures within safe limits while enabling rapid response to changing demand
patterns, firefighting needs, or supply constraints.
Because PRVs operate at the boundary between pressure planes, ongoing maintenance and
calibration are essential. The most recent water modeling study by Freese and Nichols in 2025
recommended to continue PRV monitoring through remote telemetry, expanding operational
playbooks for emergency transfers, and ensuring mechanical backups are available if automated
systems fail, as is done currently, reinforcing the City's existing efforts. Integrating PRV performance
data into SCADA supports real-time decisions and improves system resilience.
DETOUR
nHEAD
3N
16 WATER MASTER PLAN SOUTHLAKE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
t
�i
WATER INFRASTRUCTURE
SYSTEM SOUTHLAKE
Legend
Well Main by Diameter -10,
C�Water Storage Facility-IS- I
79 •
ri ur1' !=—'tom■,
i1T7i�r,*iil �■
�nllmall�
r�ll�f1►• �' II
�1 1 ♦�F kiihil
h
� `?�':� �:+= � •tea ���� 1►.
_ oX�
x Ali �a i�f
I� All
..
`mCllel■. \`�� �+fie its
/:iI IAill
��\
j A•Hrni� YK �'�� ��• ���At.�� �■■Ems
—�, ilk Iqr'; 4.r +����� '`l'111fl1111`'►''�1►
■rnnlYgll��
.wn19ii1�s �n '.::��� ' arilr�r��_i11A� 1.i�i1� im4 --
.rs6i/tL9.w,li.. IMramJr Irll a• ♦ ■ ■f■ - '1 1 1
1'Aeem�u■ l il�nLr11 "
rw s��■a/mm■[:� IllrlIL111i ice► � - 'g'•� �Ilrlllr+-y��l►`��1.;��\i�+r- --
r �a�lwn �5���_ri:ii.,o n ��lllll��„•-'ii���.f
� � NI�+l7 , ■_ .xn., e,�� r �, �"�I��ii11/Y, r 1
all, Y1r1A■i 1 • t it
off f�a. ��li ,�aa� - I ♦ L�eov�..:m. 1!(--
n11
o NIL �,�. +''�18 !'mb WEN
.., rll�a �lilr�flmr'`�':i ■€a'•
MEMO 4
High � �♦� 0 � : +l . • 111 .. r'l■.•�L� la. ay all
r /"WIl
�.. irl,Raral754!+Ikrf Itil' � � �i� � ■ m� f r,.
Im�111r!!11 tllFrt�� si 11�n r
Pressure.,
r&
111111111`p Rill, ►�*♦dllplL
•r a.rq/����a� �/I rl/►♦1-f-FalYlf... 'nn.:::a.: r
9, f'y �_.:.,:z�. �1G1.,.•�.J,._, .,...,. yl� r.egt�
Plane IR a,i it v1lr+•�� P u- al
�.■w �tn III-jl��A�&1/ /l l+n
.r■•..eta►� /II�� till.. r ...� ■/n.r��rr 15 r ur.irl�i�
�{r�►Gi��♦:► �4 n4111 .-...'-•.in ill" fir lG.xa� 1� 1 ' iftli�Y'■71
41ir\jai►f'S •.+ r^+rrin`�•r I.�► i='-L.i1111 •rr.r��-► -� �'•� q� ■-�,ri� .. 0nrinv 1r
' ;« !lls�ii\I::n: �htuca�i9��:,■, L.�,,1! \11 c^�pr �. "nxlnn
e.•,■5L�_ II N i ,IY�3� 4nl* l�'�• 1s.-=1111A�♦•��iC� �■:.r..�
■ 1;'.a �jI ra- ��Prr'rl... r ixuL iiiiy=7nut r•fr�l'��rm r"' ii►��i~r` i=:.Cis 'Fii,n �i1��+ �� •,°
WW. �i4i■I.r �y * ■q�u Ir■R.ur.ii n: a'_ _ .1lIj�J1111111LT�raan .:L,3inr ri S .�- wlr.GaNryA\[".I�ri.r
„'\,ti
11 p5A r lr.YTd r 1 1\-�b: ���d' IH� ^�_ �,3 ■ 1.. III h,`,�L
■:
'�1 -11.1.. a >.nr�l,..t -� 4r.. r���� r'�'�:.x■
BI'� -_I"y�'•-Ian, .. sir- � if *}Il�hll4G_I��iiI4a7 �5f�4yieC
m� IIINIIIIIIi;=' = JI �! a;: '�! � '� , , .�' E,"� Y` kale i ,�- ��f" �I;• R.
I��MWfi61'�®' r .!�x`.�1 Al
mi• { ��,wMl r I.i��nyL7Rl c+ a`
�r r• wF #, h r , , ' I r}i9 :�?r,.a �\ r �--- �� :•1 t 1�
\�.. - r.■^•�.��.J' �.•.�.:I ,4 �11f �11! y , 11w a,aJr.ij ini �s _ rF. -.r.
i11z i,h'J • �•€ �Sfa ,■ul r7 rl AO�rawevnn.�ll�_...1 Y- t��lA ��3....
w `.y., :: /J.Q.���1u�� Islla+..a.ynoln� .ram .1 rilav��
. 7'- / t..I.a.��•.. .4+ Il•. r �- I�J� IAA :,Z& �1J
.■.,aw �� �•a.• .r;1 a @1� - u.ar tri.■.,na _ �i t' 4 a�•.
—p .r m ,a'_tr' J '1.. •'�R��f[�T11 � p......,q-O.rllral.. IlaI.IL ■ f ppe�r S
- pl�i4 ■■lS�iu Q ■ •• , ^yran.lNi'{l�wl xle / m fi/Yi
7 - F7 7LL : g is ■I.r1��IgF.' ' ���A
� R yy 1 �1•{I!1 -,r.L.i,a �:: ':i� �[ -. r��L!J11 1 a•,`~'«•"r�S .IZ.•� -Pl ��■ ......■
IAIA`F S.1 .T;ri ! 1 r,evre �a_:--•r_--- + 7.
.If i �f�!• rr. :e" ieeT;= -..yY4x ,IZl�,.ft^:'.�r r , s y aA-■r.
:a=ai•u.'�7p c":eo-_� 1- ■ ?v.,.. — '�S sr;:man -tsciliaaUl.n.i r p
■ "' •5 Wig- �4�. , , ► ,- �'dd� 1■■!R[ i,
�� ?IReg 1F':rn� ■� . rr• j 1 ■i1.:C.rr, \ -' 9f-in`�iir11' -
....1Yr�a� 1�a�e wig.
•, •.le•-Ir v .6�Ifll�.rllr�• 1;M•' Iw.u�_``•" .: J�,�. � '�
■ec�e••� r.r�ea�`•
__� lrniu_rlalJ-S.'1■a�r�n ;r•.e ;Yn.'� a ,� .�b':�:mule' ': '� °�'.. =�ri a•.y- -�� !i�
I.yL1A1r v!MIIY e' �,rs�r _ fiii:..■ a-.s _1.I t f'�}�•/r+- +
um� =! �u`r:�..:_r s .r,• 7- ■ill L "'.'
sc■ ■`' 1a '« lYr:r r/t GYCi�
le[
: i�n[,irL III,tr. ('A,:r "a '.% ' n +.�71 -$
:I/r O�Frii rail• +r: �I,w nv'• d i•.,�J, T �'�� .r
•it� arra 'r a::;��S :;'i s7. r..�•�• s r r ._ Ii t n..„� v==' i
ilitu` +..r�.'1 .���,.• .,-.� _4't t>,.la''-`'- ♦ ,1.�is ,9.,�`4f�
SFr r .s3��
1
r
_ ,L r.
_
Understanding water demand patterns, past, pre t, and f is essential to ensuring that
Southlake's water system remains reliable, efficient d re ilient. D and analysis guides nearly
every aspect of water system planning, from op on trategies during high-use periods to
long-range decisions about pumping, storage, and di tion capacity. It also influences financial
planning, regulatory compliance, and the ti and itization of capital investments. For a
community like Southlake nearing buildout bu agi seasonal irrigation peaks, emergency
preparedness needs, and evolving requireme s forecasting is not simply a technical
exercise. It is a practical foundation f int g consistent service and planning responsibly
over time.
This chapter establishes the b line used throughout the Water Master Plan. It summarizes
historical demand trends enti th rimary factors driving seasonal peaks, and presents
projected demand condi s for exi ng nd buildout planning years. It also explains how Freese
and Nichols developed the ' 's de nd projections and outlines the federal and state mandates
that shape water system per a and planning requirements. Demand stewardship and water
conservation program strateg addressed in Chapter 7 to ensure that the "what" (demand
conditions) and the "how" (tools to manage demand) are presented in the most useful sequence for
implementation.
HISTORICAL AND FUTURE NEEDS
Southlake's water demands have evolved alongside its transformation from a rural, well-dependent
community to a fully developed city with a high standard of service. System demands increased
rapidly from the late 1980s through the early 2000s as residential and commercial development
accelerated. During that period, the City invested in storage, pump station capacity, and distribution
system looping to meet peak summer irrigation demand and ensure adequate fire flow and
operational redundancy.
Annual water use trends over the last two decades indicate that total demand has stabilized as
Southlake approaches buildout. While the number of service connections continues to increase
modestly through infill development, average daily demand has remained relatively consistent
supported by conservation measures, customer awareness, and improved irrigation efficiency.
18 WATER MASTER PLAN I SOUTHILAKE COMPREHENSIVE
WATER MASTER PLAN
The most significant demand pressures remain seasonal. Peak use occurs during extended hot,
dry weather when outdoor irrigation can dominate total consumption. These recurring patterns
continue to shape how the City plans for pumping, storage, and operational flexibility.
Future planning therefore requires a shift in emphasis.The challenge is not simply to add capacity, but
to maintain peak-period reliability and emergency readiness while managing aging infrastructure and
improving operational efficiency. This demand context informs the system performance evaluation
in Chapter 5 and supports the plan's focus on long-term reinvestment and resilient operations as the
community nears buildout.
Day Avg. Day Maximum Day Maximum MD:AD Annual
Year Population Demand Per Capita Per Capita Day Demand Peaking Rainfall (in)
.• • .• • Factor
2011 26,600 11.31 425 824 21.93 1.94 25.88
2012 26,770 10.07 376 863 23.09 2.29 31.26
2013 27,080 8.99 332 861 .33 2.60 29.40
2014 27,330 9.14 334 733 2004. 2.19 21.32
2015 27,710 8.17 295 880 38 2.98 62.61
2016 28,290 8.13 288 766 2 . 2.66 35.48
2017 28,880 8.92 309 5 16.2M 1.82 36.62
2018 29,580 7.98 270 21.03 2.64 55.97
2019 30,010 8.02 267 651 19.55 2.44 34.52
2020 30,370 8.63 284 4 21.09 2.44 43.70
2021' 31,660 8.45 267 Ilk 17.61 2.08 33.59
2022 31,770 10.40 IW77 24.67 2.37 36.64
2023' 31,975 10.58 05 31 N W87 25.16 2.38 29.31
2024 32,119 9.89 30 61 21.24 2.14 40.34
2025 32,264 9.63 640 20.65 2.14 38.31
Maximum Day from billing meter djowh a d 111ftater loss basedon historical data
Annual Rainfall totals compiled frjffrvww.weath v DM-Monthly and Annual Precipitation
Fi a 3-1: Historic Water Demand
2024 1 High 1 6,956 1 1,772
2024 1 Low 1 25,019 30,831
Totals2024 • .0
Buildout (2040) High 7,183 1,895
Buildout (2040) Low 27,245 38,612
Buildout •tals 34,428 ••
Figure 3-2:Residential and Employment Projections
Population and employment projections were developed for two planning years, existing (2024)
and buildout (2040), with buildout defined as the period when Southlake is fully developed. The
City's Land Use Plan, NCTCOG projections, and City staff served as the primary data sources used
when calculating these projections. Growth from existing to buildout was applied at the parcel
level based on future land use, provided development plans, and NCTCOG Census Block Groups.
Between existing and buildout conditions, population projections reflect an average annual growth
rate of approximately 0.4%, and employment projections reflect an average annual growth rate of
approximately 1.3%.
UNACCOUNTED-FOR WATER (NON-REVENUE WATER)
Unaccounted-for water (UAW), also referred to as non-revenue water, represents the difference
between the volume of water supplied to the system and the volume billed to customers. UAW
can result from system leaks, main breaks, meter inaccuracies, unauthorized use, and authorized
but unmetered consumption such as firefighting or system flushing. Tracking and reducing UAW
supports both operational efficiency and financial stewardship by limiting avoidable losses that
increase purchased water volume and system stress.
TCEQ guidance recommends maintaining UAW at or below 10% of total supply. Southlake has
historically performed better than this benchmark, but proactive management is increasingly
important as infrastructure ages. Best practices include routine system audits, meter testing and
calibration, leak detection programs, and systematic replacem of older meters. Incorporating
water loss tracking into the City's Asset Management Plan wil ow staff to correlate loss patterns
with pipe age, material, and break history to better target r investments. Advanced metering
infrastructure (AMI) also improves consumption accuracy en a s earlier detection of customer-
side leaks, strengthening customer service and syste rformanc
PEAKING FACTORS
Peaking factors describe how much demand ses a e the average during high-use periods.
They are essential in system planning because to ge, and major pipelines must perform
during the highest demand conditions not jus age day. In Southlake, peaking is most
pronounced during summer months riga n use drives sharp increases in daily and hourly
demand. Historically, maximum d em ds h e ranged from approximately 1.8 to 2.2 times
average day demand, while peak r d ing irrigation periods can reach 3.0 to 3.5 times
average day levels.
These peak conditions pl he gr st ss on pumping and storage facilities, and can influence
localized pressure perfor ce. Man ing peaks, require both operational flexibility and long-term
planning discipline. Opera I str gies such as coordinated pump sequencing, staged tank
drawdowns, and PRV transfer duce stress during high-use periods. Over the long term, the
ability to moderate peak use th gh demand stewardship tools (addressed in Chapter 7) helps
protect service reliability, reduce energy and operating costs, and extend the useful life of key
assets.
FUTURE WATER DEMANDS
Future demand projections for Southlake must account for near-buildout conditions, modest infill
development, redevelopment in select commercial areas, and continued evolution in per-capita
use due to conservation measures and technology. While total annual demand is not expected
to increase substantially, the timing and intensity of peak demands will continue to drive system
operational and capacity needs.
The most recent planning studies indicate that buildout maximum day demand will remain within
the combined capacity of the two Fort Worth supply connections, provided both are available and
operating at contractual capacity. Maintaining adequate redundancy remains important particularly
during seasonal peaks, supplier maintenance periods, or regional drought conditions making
continued monitoring of supply deliveries, system performance, and peak demand trends essential.
WATER MASTER PLAN
Pressure Residential Non-Residential Avg. Day Maximum Peak Hour
Plane Population Employment Demand Day Demand Demand
Existing High 6,956 1,772 1.98 4.76 10.48
Existing Low 25,019 30,831 8.60 20.65 45.43
Existing Totals 31,975 32,603 10.59 •
Buildout (2040) High 7,183 1,895 2.05 4.93 10.84
Buildout (2040) Low 27,245 38,612 9.67 23.21 51.07
Figure 3-3: Water Demand Projections
To support resiliency, the City will periodically reassess demand and supply scenarios, particularly
after significant changes in development patterns or sustained shifts in weather-driven irrigation
demand. These evaluations should consider regional growth in the Fort Worth service area, potential
wholesale rate impacts, and longer-term uncertainty such as ex ded dry periods that can elevate
seasonal peaks.
WATER DEMAND PROJECTIONS METHODOLOGY
Water demands were projected for the City's existi and 'Idout planning periods by Freese and
Nichols. Historical per-capita trends provided the ba electing design criteria used to project
average day demand, with conservative us assu tions r ting low rainfall (dry) years. Freese and
Nichols selected a design non-residentialof allons per employee per day (GPED)
and a design residential usage rate of 270 ga ns i a per day (GPCD) based on historical
consumption patterns.
These assumptions result in an o II ex' ing s em average day per-capita of 330 GPCD and
an overall buildout system averag y of 340 GPCD. This overall design per-capita is
consistent with the highest h' ica erage per-capita observed between 2013 and 2022 (334
GPCD). Average day dema o h ning year was calculated using:
Equation 1: (Population x ign GP ) + (Employment x Design GPED) = Average Day Demand
A design maximum day-to-av day peaking factor was selected based on historical peaking
factors from 2011 through 2022. e average historical MD/AD factor was 2.37, with a maximum of
2.98 (2015). Freese and Nichols selected a design MD/AD peaking factor of 2.4, greater than the
historical average but below the historical maximum, to support responsible sizing and infrastructure
planning. Maximum day demand was calculated using:
Equation 2: Average Day Demand x (MD/AD) = Maximum Day Demand
For peak hour projections, Freese and Nichols reviewed hourly usage from the highest usage days
in July and August 2023 and selected a peak hour-to-maximum day peaking factor of 2.2. Peak hour
demand was calculated using:
Equation 3: Maximum Day Demand x (PH/MD) = Peak Hour Demand
The planning criteria and resulting demand projections for existing and buildout planning years are
summarized in the tables and figures that follow. Based on projected supply and demand, the City
will continue monitoring wholesale deliveries from Fort Worth and system performance to confirm
Criteria Value
Residential Per Capita (gpcd) 270
Non-residential Per Capita (gpcd) 60
Maximum Day to Average Day Peaking Factor 2.4
Peak Hour to Maximum Day Peaking Factor 2.2
Figure 3-4: Water Demand Projections Planning Criteria
70
60 Hiss Pro
Z040
50
2023 61.91 MGD
51.91 MGD
40
t�
20 2040
T 30 25. GD 28.14 MGD
E
p 20
10 .+ + owe ,—I
2023 2040
10.59 MGD 11.73 MGD
0
(o 00 O -NY a
oti oti oti oti oti oti o oti oti oti oti o'�oti oti oti oti oti o'' o�' o'� �' o''
titiTTIVTT ti � titiT 'VTTTTT titititiTTT
Historical AD Dem Projected AD Demand —e— Projected MD Demand
f Historical MD Demand —0— Projected PH Demand
Figure 3-5: City-Wide Water Demand Projections by Planning Year
that system needs are met and that facilities are sized, operated, and maintained to comply with
applicable requirements.
FEDERAL AND STATE MANDATED REQUIREMENTS
Southlake's water system operates within a comprehensive framework of federal and state
requirements that establish minimum standards for water quality, operational performance, planning,
reporting, and emergency preparedness. Compliance with these requirements is fundamental to
protecting public health, maintaining public confidence, and ensuring system reliability during
normal operations and emergency conditions. Regulatory standards also influence capital planning
by defining baseline expectations related to storage adequacy, pumping standards, water loss
benchmarks, and emergency readiness.
WATER MASTER PLAN
Federal requirements, such as those established under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), guide
water quality monitoring and compliance expectations for public water systems. Broader resilience
and preparedness requirements including those associated with the America's Water Infrastructure
Act (AWIA) reinforce the importance of risk assessment and emergency response planning. At the
state level, TCEQ requirements address design and operational standards, water loss reporting,
conservation planning, drought contingency planning, and emergency preparedness measures that
have been strengthened through recent legislation such as Texas Senate Bill 3.
Some mandates require recurring reporting, while others require periodic updates and approvals
for plans such as the Water Conservation Plan and Drought Contingency Plan. Together, these
requirements create a baseline that the City must meet and, in many cases, exceed to sustain
Southlake's service expectations. A summary table of key requirements is provided at the end of
this section, identifying each mandate, the governing agency, the primary provisions applicable to
Southlake, and the frequency of required reporting or plan updates.
Requires risk andZresilic asses nts; preparationAmerica's Water U.S. Environmental of emergency relans addre physical,
Infrastructure Act Protection Agency cyber, and operasit" nce; coo ation withEvery 5 years
(AWIA) (EPA) local emergency mmittees.
U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Ongoing/
Safe Drinking Sets nati inkinN uality standards;
(EPA)/Texas Plan updates
Water Act requires r i eporting, and
Commission on as required by
(SDWA) Environmental Quality complianc ith ant limits. TCEQ
(TCEQ) Lj
Emergency Texas Commission equi abili o operate water system during Ongoing/
>24- ow utage; maintain 20 psi minimum Plan updates
Preparedness Plan Environmental Qua r emergencies; TCEQ-approved as required by
(Senate Bill 3) (TCEQ) ergency preparedness plan. TCEQ
Water Texas Co sion EslWshes conservation goals, strategies to reduce
Conservation Plan Environ al Qualit ateWbss and encourage efficient use; TCEQ Every 5 years
(TCEQ) pproval required.
Drought Texas Com n on utlines staged drought response measures, including
Contingency Plan Environmental I, restrictions on non-essential use; TCEQ approval Every 5 years
(TCEQ) required.
Public Drinking Texas Commission on Sets minimum design, operational, and maintenance
Water Standards Environmental Quality standards for public water systems including pressure, Ongoing/
JAC Title 30, (TCEQ) storage, and capacity requirements. Continuous
Chapter 290)
Other TCEQ
Texas Commission on Ongoing/
Water System Environmental Quality Includes firm pumping capacity, minimum storage, Annual reporting
Performance (TCEQ) water loss reporting, and cross-connection control. for water loss
Requirements
Figure 3-6:Federal and State Requirements Summary
S
Y-
4
i
A reliable water system depends on more th ipes, pum and storage it depends on
understanding how those components perform tog r u r real op rating conditions. Hydraulic
modeling is one of the City's most important tools fo derstanding. It provides a systemwide
view of how water moves through the network durin ormal daily use, peak summer irrigation
periods, firefighting events, and operational u uch a uipment outages or temporary supply
constraints. In a built-out community where e i shifts from expanding the system to
sustaining performance, a current hydr lic m Ip onfirm that service expectations can be
met today and supports more disci cisi s about what must be reinvested in, when, and
why.
This chapter summarizes the 's recent hydraulic model update and the validation steps
used to confirm that mod a onsistent with observed field conditions. The updated
model provides the tech I foun n the performance evaluation in Chapter 5 and supports
implementation across plan in rming capital planning, asset management prioritization,
operational strategies, and -ter ompliance with regulatory expectations and adopted Levels
of Service.
HYDRAULIC MODEL UPDATE
A hydraulic water model is an essential planning and operational tool for understanding how
water moves within the distribution system, predicting system behavior under varying demand
conditions, and evaluating the impacts of proposed improvements. The model simulates flows and
pressures throughout the transmission and distribution network, accounts for tank cycling and
pump operations, and reflects how the High- and Low-Pressure Planes interact through PRVs. When
built and maintained as a living dataset, the model becomes a practical decision-support platform:
it helps identify localized performance constraints, evaluates the system's ability to meet peak day
and peak hour demands, and supports planning for emergency operations and future development
conditions.
For this Water Master Plan, Freese & Nichols developed an "all-pipes" hydraulic model in InfoWater
Pro using the City's GIS dataset of operational water lines (excluding private service laterals). The all-
pipes approach is especially valuable in a mature system because it captures the hydraulic behavior
WATER MASTER PLAN
of the full distribution grid not only major transmission corridors allowing the City to identify
neighborhood-level constraints that can affect pressure, circulation, and fire flow performance. The
model represents both pressure planes and includes key system facilities such as pump stations,
elevated and ground storage tanks, supply connections, and PRV stations. It supports both
"snapshot" evaluations and extended period simulations that replicate a full operating day, which
is important for understanding tank turnover, diurnal demand patterns, and peak-period stress on
pumps and storage.
The most recent model update incorporated new infrastructure, updated demand data, and
revised peaking factors consistent with current water-use trends. It also reflects boundary and
network refinements associated with main extensions, looping improvements, and updated as-built
information since previous planning efforts. Updates such as refined pipe characteristics and facility
operations improve the model's ability to replicate real-world performance, particularly during
high-demand conditions when service reliability is most sensitive. The updated model reflects
both wholesale supply connections from the City of Fort Worth, current pump station capacities
at Pearson Road and T.W. King, and current storage volumes is also configured to evaluate
future planning scenarios, including buildout demand con ditio alternative tank cycling strategies,
PRV operations, and emergency events such as pump fai ine breaks, or temporary supply
reductions.
As Southlake approaches buildout, maintaining a cur and u to-date hydraulic model is
essential for prioritizing reinvestment, validating t e for pipeline replacement or upsizing,
and confirming that pressure, flow, and fire protectio xpectations can be achieved across the
system. It also strengthens the City's ability to defe e, transparent decisions linking system
performance outcomes to recommended proj is to -range asset management practices.
DEMAND ALLOCATION APPROACH
How demand is assigned across m al because it determines where the system is
"tested" under peak conditions. A m hat ac urately represents facilities and pipes but assigns
demand too broadly, or in g ations, can understate localized constraints that matter
to customers, such as to ressur In bility in higher elevations, limited fire flow in smaller-
diameter neighborhood s, or cir lation issues that contribute to water age concerns.
For the Water Master Plan upda , Freese & Nichols developed demand allocations consistent with
the City's existing and buildout planning assumptions and the demand projection methodology
described in Chapter 3. Demands were distributed across the modeled network to reflect where
population and employment are located today and where remaining infill or redevelopment demand
is expected as the community approaches buildout. This approach aligns system evaluation with real
service conditions and ensures that future scenario testing reflects the City's land use framework
rather than generalized growth assumptions.
Demand allocation also supports the model's ability to evaluate peak-day and peak-hour
performance. By applying peaking factors to the base demand distribution, the model can replicate
the geographic concentration of peak use especially outdoor irrigation and assess how that peak
stress affects pressures, tank drawdown patterns, pumping demands, and operational flexibility. This
provides a clearer basis for identifying where performance margins are tight, where reinvestment
will protect service expectations, and where operational strategies can improve system outcomes
without major capital expansion.
LA
HYDRAULIC MODEL VA ATION
Model validation confirms t e hydraulic model reflects real-world system behavior
and can be relied upon for p ning decisions. Validation is especially important because
120 120
100 100
80 80 ' '��,•�,,�',,'..r��", ^� ' \hJ'\r-rf.��,,./�r'�//�\�J_�r�^,•y�`1,�
.a .a
60 3 60
a 40 a 40 M
20 20
0 0
24-Aug 26-Aug 28-Aug 30-Aug 1-Sep 3-Sep 5-Sep 24-Aug 26-Aug 28-Aug 30-Aug 1-Sep 3-Sep 5-Sep
—PR#06 PR#09 —PR#01 —PR#02 PR#03 —PR#04 PR#05
—PR#07 PR#08 —PR#10 PR#11
Figure 4-2:Pressure Testing Results Figure 4-3:Pressure Testing Results
(High Pressure Plane) (Low Pressure Plane)
26 WATER MASTER PLAN I SOUTHLAKE COMPREHENSIVE
WATER MASTER PLAN
modeling results influence high-impact actions such as how the City evaluates performance,
prioritizes projects, and establishes the technical basis for levels of service. The validation
process compares model outputs to observed conditions using multiple sources of
information, including pressure monitoring, hydrant flow test data where available, and
SCADA records from key facilities.
Validation begins by comparing modeled pressures at representative locations with field-
measured pressures recorded during normal and peak operating conditions. Temporary
pressure loggers are deployed throughout the system including both the High- and Low-
Pressure Planes to capture how pressure varies across elevations, time of day, and seasonal
demand patterns. These measurements help confirm that modeled hydraulic grades,
demand distribution, and zone boundaries reflect how the system actually performs. Where
available, hydrant flow testing provides an additional check on localized model behavior by
comparing measured flows and residual pressures with modeled results, helping confirm
assumptions related to friction, pipe characteristics, and n ork performance.
SCADA data supports validation by providing oper n onfirmation of pump station
performance, tank level fluctuations, and diurnal pa ns that ve how the system behaves
over a 24-hour period. Where differences are o rve betw modeled and measured
conditions, calibration adjustments may include ni emand allocation, adjusting facility
settings, updating PRV assumptions, or modifyin draulic parameters to better reflect
observed behavior. Once validated, the m eco a dependable platform for scenario
testing and long-range planning supporti e o f buildout conditions, operational
resilience, and reinvestment needs.
Freese & Nichols performed fie pres re to 'ng from August 24, 2022 to September 7,
2022 using 11 temporary pressur alled across both pressure planes. Pressures
were recorded at five-mi 'nt Is, providing a detailed dataset that captures real-
world variability across e s m. eported system pressures during the monitoring
period generally rang rom ap xi ately 36 psi to 86 psi, with an average of about 58
psi—providing a meanin benc ark used in model calibration and validation.
. - . ADOPTED
--------------
SO THLAK 7 ,
_S_Z I M.
Ir
This chapter documents how the City evalu whetNerwater distribution system
can reliably deliver service under both typical ope g c itd the conditions that place
the greatest stress on the system such as maximu mand, peak hour demand, firefighting
events, and operational outages. Using the updated by lic model, the evaluation identifies where
pressures, pumping performance, storage be and work constraints become limiting and
translates those findings into targeted improve en port reliable service through buildout.
The objective is not simply meeting imum dar , but maintaining operational flexibility,
reducing the risk of localized low-p co tions, and sequencing investments proactively
rather than responding after servi sue ccur.
For a near-buildout communit st erformance is increasingly shaped by peak conditions and
localized network constrai t overall annual growth trends. Even when average daily
demand changes only m stly, pe ho demand and concentration of irrigation use can create
short-duration pressure s falls, li fire flow readiness in specific areas, or reduce the system's
ability to recover storage of raw wn. For that reason, the evaluation focuses on "stress points"
revealed through modeled op s across a 24-hour simulation capturing both the peak hour
and the system's ability to stabile and recover over the course of a day.
PLANNING STANDARDS AND SERVICE EXPECTATIONS USED FOR EVALUATION
The evaluation relies on a consistent set of planning and regulatory criteria so that system
performance can be assessed and recommended actions can be prioritized using a repeatable
standard. At the regulatory level, the City must maintain minimum pressures across the distribution
system, including defined allowances during firefighting conditions, and demonstrate adequate
supply, storage, and pumping capacity relative to the number of connections served. These baseline
requirements establish the minimum threshold for compliance and public health protection.
In addition to regulatory expectations, the evaluation considers planning-level performance
measures that reflect how customers experience service. Residents and businesses do not interact
with the system as a set of technical values; they experience it as stable pressure, dependable
fire protection capability, consistent operations during high-demand periods, and minimal service
disruption when equipment is down for maintenance. For that reason, the criteria in this chapter
function as the plan's measurable definition of reliable water service, how the system should perform
WATER MASTER PLAN
RequirementElement TCEQ . .-. Criteria
Pumping See TCEQ Pumping Requirement chart 55%/60% of peak hour demand
Elevated Storage Minimum Requirement = 100 gal/connection 45%/40% of peak hour demand for 3 Hours
Optional Requirement = 200 gal/connection plus fire flow volume (3,500 gpm for 3 hours)
Ground Storage TCEQ looks at total storage not ground 8-12 hours of maximum day demand
storage as a standalone parameter.
Pressure Greater than or equal to 35 psi Greater than or equal to 35 psi
(Residual)
Pressure (Fire Greater than or equal to 20 psi Greater than or equal to 20 psi
flow)
Water Line Not defined by TCEQ Minimum Capacity 6 ft/s
Velocity Requirements
Water Line Not defined by TCEQ Minimum Capacity 3 ft/1,000 ft for lines larger than 16-inches.
Headloss Requirements 7 ft/1,000 ft for lines 16-inches and smaller.
Gradient
Figure 5-1: Summary of Design Crite
when demand is highest, how storage should cycle
to maintain stability, and what operational margin is
needed to sustain service during routine maintenance
and unexpected events. Establishing these criteria a "WHAT ABLE
the plan's adopted service standard is how the Ci RVICE MEANS IN
converts community expectations into a measurable, PRACTICE"
Policy Statement PRESSURE STABILITY.1 STORAGE
LS1. Define and maintain clear _-v%. RECOVERY FIRE PROTECTION
serviceof for the water cy READINESS OPERATIONAL
reflect community _ _ MINns FLEXIBILITY AND WATER QUALITY.
reliability, •
• system • - • •
expectations • 9 • - plann. •
6=iii
actionable commitment ensuring that infrastructure planning and capital investment are anchored
to the level of reliability residents and businesses have a right to expect, rather than defined by
minimum regulatory thresholds alone. That direct connection between community expectation and
planning direction is the operational foundation of Policy Statement LS1.
SUPPLY ANALYSIS
Southlake's supply is purchased through wholesale delivery from the City of Fort Worth and must
be understood through two complementary lenses: regulatory deliverability relative to the number
of connections and practical performance during maximum day conditions. From a regulatory
standpoint, the City's contractual supply arrangement exceeds the minimum per-connection supply
expectations through buildout, establishing a strong baseline for compliance planning and service
adequacy.
From an operational standpoint,maximum day demand can approach or exceed contracted maximum
day delivery depending on conditions and how demand concentrates during the hottest, driest
periods. This does not automatically indicate immediate service failure because storage provides
ORDINANCE NO. . ADOPTED
balancing volume and can offset short-term differences between the rate of delivery and the rate of
consumption—especially when paired with effective pumping operations and tank management. In
practical terms, this reinforces the importance of storage as an operational resiliency asset, not just
a compliance requirement, and underscores the need for continued coordination with Fort Worth to
confirm long-term assumptions as regional conditions and seasonal peak demands evolve.
STORAGE CAPACITY AND ANALYSIS
Storage is one of the primary ways a city "buys" reliability. It provides balancing volume during peak
use, helps stabilize pressure by maintaining hydraulic grade, and supports emergency response
capacity. For Southlake, storage also serves as an operational tool that helps offset the mismatch
between instantaneous peak demand and the rate at which supply can be delivered through
wholesale connections and pumped into each pressure plane.
The evaluation indicates that Southlake's existing storage meets state requirements when compared
to current connections and aligns with planning targets used to luate system performance. This
establishes a strong baseline for reliability as the City mov _ward buildout. Looking forward,
the analysis indicates that total storage and elevated story sholds remain sufficient through
buildout under the City's adopted standards, meaning ong ge strategy can focus less on
adding elevated storage solely for compliance and m on impr resiliency and operational
flexibility especially where ground storage supports over ility an peak-period operations.
The primary future storage recommendation is the ad n of ground storage at the T.W. King site
by buildout. In practical terms, this type of in ent s thens the system's ability to manage
peak day drawdown, respond to supply disrup n a ain stable operations without placing
excessive stress on pumps and transmission pat ge strategy is therefore less about "how
much volume exists in total" and mor t w er storage is located, cycled, and supported in
a way that reinforces both pressur nes d pr erves emergency reserves during stress events.
Low 9,443 0 0.94 3.19 Yes Yes 477
High 2,353 1. 0.24 1.22 Yes Yes 638
Figu 5-2:Existing Elevated Storage Capacities
PUMPING CAPACITY AND OPERATIONAL FLEXIBILITY
Pumping capacity determines whether the City can move supply into each pressure plane fast
enough to meet peak hour conditions and recover storage after daily drawdown. The evaluation
uses a firm capacity lens available pumping capacity with the largest pump out of service because
that reflects realistic operating conditions during maintenance or outages and helps ensure the
system remains functional during disruptions, not only under ideal conditions.
Based on the capacity comparisons documented in the model analysis, existing pumping capacity
meets state requirements and aligns with planning criteria for existing conditions. This indicates the
system is not constrained in an overall, systemwide sense today. However, localized performance
challenges can still occur during peak hour events depending on where demand concentrates and
how water is routed through the network. Adequate total pumping capacity does not automatically
eliminate localized low-pressure vulnerability, which is why distribution system performance and
headloss constraints remain a key focus later in this chapter.
WATER MASTER PLAN
Looking forward, pumping needs are primarily driven by peak hour deliverability and the need to
maintain pressure levels in both pressure planes during stress conditions. The evaluation indicates
that additional pumping capacity will be needed within the planning horizon to sustain firm capacity
margins as demands shift and service expectations remain high. Importantly, the model shows that
ConditionPumping Capacity Requirement
1. If providing at least 200 gallons per connection of Two service pumps with a minimum combined capacity of 0.6
elevated storage gpm per connection at each pressure plane.
The lesser of or •
2. If providing less than 200 gallons per connection (a) Total pumping capacity of 2.0 gpm per connection
of elevated storage (b) Total capacity of at least 1,000 gpm and the ability to meet
peak hourly demands with the largest pump out of service
Figure 5-3: TCEQ Pumping Criteria
some pumping recommendations are driven less by overall flow capacity and more by pressure
performance during the peak hour. This reinforces a planning p ciple central to this Master Plan:
pump investments are level-of-service investments intended to serve minimum residual pressures
and fire protection readiness during the most demanding h the year.
PIPELINE VELOCITIES
Pipeline velocities provide an important screening s both system performance and long-
term asset condition. Excessively high velocities can in to constrained corridors where headloss
increases sharply during peak conditions, co ting t calized pressure drops and increased
energy demand. High velocities can also accel to n educe operational flexibility when the
system is stressed. Conversely, persistently to itI n certain areas can contribute to water
age concerns and reduced circulatio ular n dead-end segments or low-turnover zones.
Velocity screening helps identify re tion network is carrying peak demand in ways
that may not be sustainable long-te d whe e targeted reinforcement or operational changes
would improve performan ou ke shifts toward long-term reinvestment, this type of
screening supports smart roject in y highlighting the segments most likely to contribute to
pressure instability and o ational s ss during peak periods.
SYSTEM PRESSURES
System pressure is one of the clearest indicators of service quality and reliability. Pressure stability
affects customer experience, supports fire protection readiness, and reflects how effectively supply,
pumping, storage, and distribution pathways are working together. Pressure performance is also
the most sensitive to peak hour conditions especially during summer irrigation when demand
concentrates rapidly in certain areas and headloss increases across the network.
The hydraulic analysis evaluates pressures during maximum day conditions with a focus on the
peak hour, because this is typically when the system experiences its lowest residual pressures.
Under existing peak conditions, most modeled pressures in the Low-Pressure Plane remain above
minimum standards, with localized areas of sensitivity near higher elevations. In the High-Pressure
Plane, modeled results indicate that pressures can fall below the minimum threshold during the
peak hour across a significant portion of the plane, with pressures generally recovering above
minimum levels during the remainder of the day. This distinction is important: the system's primary
vulnerability is not an all-day deficiency, but a short-duration performance gap during the most
demanding hour. Targeted improvements should therefore focus on reducing headloss, improving
deliverability, and strengthening operational flexibility to improve peak-hour resilience. Addressing
these vulnerabilities before they become broader reliability events is the proactive risk reduction
that Policy Statement SR1 establishes as the foundation for delivering safe, reliable, and consistent
water service.
DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM ANALYSIS INCLUDING PLANNING-LEVEL FIRE FLOW READINESS
Distribution system performance depends on how well the network can deliver water to the right
locations when and where demand occurs. The all-pipes model is particularly valuable for identifying
localized constraints that may not be visible in systemwide capacity summaries such as smaller-
diameter neighborhood mains, dead-end segments, higher-elevation pockets, and areas where
limited looping constrains flow paths.
Fire flow readiness is a critical planning consideration because it depends on a combination of
available supply, pressure stability, and network deliverability at the point of need. Maintaining
adequate fire flow capability is also a public health and regulatory obligation, one where the City
must be able to confirm, through planning-level assessment an cumented operational practice,
that the system can meet pressure and deliverability standard en emergency response demands
it most, which is precisely the safeguard that Policy Statem directs the City to maintain. This
Master Plan evaluates fire flow readiness at a planning I I by g the model to identify areas
where residual pressures and deliverability margins ar ost sensi under peak hour conditions.
While site-specific fire flow testing and developme evie emain e appropriate tools for final
verification, the planning-level evaluation helps ident the system may benefit from targeted
reinforcement to preserve reliability and public safety comes.
Where the model indicates constraints, imp e tr gies typically include strengthening
looping, reducing headloss along key pathwa r o g smaller-diameter segments that limit
deliverability, and improving operat Iexi y between zones through PRVs and storage
management. These actions help IF or rfo ance not only for fire protection but for daily
reliability during peak periods.
disciplinedSR1. Deliver safe, rellia 'e, and cc sistent SR2. Safeguard public health and
water service by prio, zing s' Aem regulatory compliance through
integrity, redundancy whek ff, Able, and monitoring, documented operating
proactive risk reduction in dai,y operations practices, and continuous improvement in
and long-range planning. water quality protection and emergency
L_ L response readiness.
WATER AGE, SOURCE TRACE, AND RESILIENCY
As Southlake transitions toward long-term system stewardship, resiliency is defined not only by the
ability to meet peak demand, but by the ability to sustain service quality and recover quickly when
conditions change. Water age and circulation are important in this context because they influence
water quality stability and customer confidence, particularly in elevated storage tanks or areas with
limited turnover. Source trace insights also support operational awareness by clarifying how water
moves through the system and which facilities and corridors are most critical to maintaining service
across each pressure plane.
The modeling analysis provides a planning lens for identifying areas where water age may be
elevated due to low turnover or limited circulation and where operational strategies such as tank
WATER MASTER PLAN
mixing systems, optimized cycling, and targeted looping can improve outcomes. These measures
are increasingly important in a mature system because they protect service consistency without
requiring expansion for growth.
Resiliency also depends on how the system performs during outages. Scenario testing helps the City
understand where single points of vulnerability exist, how quickly service impacts could emerge,
and what operational measures provide the greatest flexibility during disruptions. These insights do
not replace emergency response planning; they strengthen it by identifying the system components
and corridors that most directly influence recovery and continuity of service. Translating those
insights into aligned operational practices, staffing readiness, and capital programming so that the
City can consistently deliver on the service standard it commits to providing is the core obligation
established by Policy Statement LS3.
Areas to Watch, Operational Implications, and Outage Scenario Takeaways
Modeling results highlight several recurring themes that guide I -term decision-making:
• Peak-hour pressure sensitivity is the primary stress 'tion, particularly where elevation
and headloss compound.
• Operational recoverability, the ability to restor oange an abilize pressures after peak
use becomes a defining measure of reliability uil t.
• Targeted resiliency investments (such as strat ound storage, pumping reinforcement,
PRV monitoring/transfer protocols, and ' prove oping) provide outsized value compared
to broad expansion.
• System visibility through SCADA and r Iaybooks strengthens decision-making
during high-demand and out ndi s by reducing response time and improving
coordination.
These takeaways directly inform th n ementation strategy described later in the plan,
and they also reinforce why g-range focus is shifting toward asset management and
proactive reinvestment. T en to he ey reflect the approach that Policy Statement LS2
directs: routinely evaluati perform ce, identifying where service risks are greatest, and directing
maintenance and reinvest t to th reas that most affect reliability and customer experience.
Policy Statement
- LS3. Align operational practices,
- - capital programming with adopted levels
- - service to ensure the City can consistently
- - - - deliver
- - . .
oar
o r-- vil
-
o
CHAPTER &
WATER INFRASTRUCTUREAsSET MANAGEMENT
odaL
As Southlake approaches buildout, the long-term rforma of the water system depends
less on building new infrastructure and more on ho nsistently tLjoity maintains, renews, and
reinvests in the infrastructure it already owns. In atu ystem, tPe most significant risks to
service are rarely visible in a single project or a sin dget year. They accumulate over time
through aging pipe materials, deferred renew capac onstraints that become more sensitive
during peak conditions, and the con In
f re ve repairs. Asset management is the
discipline that allows the City to see those ri e investments deliberately, and sustain
reliable service without chasing proble fter ecome disruptions.
This chapter establishes the fra ork Sou t ke's Water Infrastructure Asset Management
Plan and explains how it suppor h licy direction for reliability, transparency, and
financial stewardship. It descr' o e City will organize and manage asset information, assess
condition and risk, prioritiz inv e nd coordinate operations and capital work in ways that
reduce lifecycle costs a ustome pa s. This chapter also explains why asset management is
central to implementing t ater ter Plan: it provides the structure to translate model-based
performance findings (Chap ) i a strategic, repeatable process for deciding what gets done
first, when, and why.
ASSET MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK (INVENTORY, CONDITION, CRITICALITY, RISK)
A comprehensive asset management program begins with a complete and usable understanding
of what the City owns, where it is located, how it performs, and what the consequences are if it
fails. For a water utility, this includes linear assets such as transmission and distribution mains, as
well as vertical and mechanical assets such as pump stations, elevated and ground storage tanks,
PRV stations, and metering systems. It also includes the enabling systems that support operations
such as SCADA, telemetry, and control equipment—because water system reliability increasingly
depends on visibility and timely response.
INVENTORY. The foundation is an organized asset inventory that is continuously maintained.
Inventory is more than a list; it is a structured record of core attributes needed for decision-making
installation year, material, size, location, service area, operational role, and known constraints. A
mature inventory reduces uncertainty, improves budget accuracy, and supports rapid response
during outages. It also enables consistent evaluation across the system so that reinvestment
decisions are not driven solely by anecdotal concerns or isolated complaints.
WATER MASTER PLAN
CONDITION. Condition assessment determines how well an asset is likely to perform now and how its
performance may change over time. In a mature system, condition cannot be inferred solely from
age; it must incorporate observed break history, leak patterns, maintenance needs, inspection
findings (for tanks and facilities), and indicators from operations data. Condition assessment
is critical because it allows the City to shift from reactive repairs to planned renewal, reducing
emergency disruptions, lowering restoration costs, and limiting water loss and property impacts.
CRITICALITY AND CONSEQUENCE. Not all assets carry the same system importance. Some segments
of pipe are redundant; others serve as essential corridors that cannot be taken out of service
without significant customer impacts. Criticality considers what an asset does for the system,
how many customers it serves, whether alternative pathways exist, whether it supports fire
protection readiness, whether it is located on a key corridor, and whether failure would create a
prolonged outage. For facilities, criticality also reflects operational role and redundancy. A pump
station, PRV station, or storage tank may be technically "one asset," but its failure could have
systemwide consequences depending on the pressure plane and available backups.
RISK. Risk combines the likelihood of failure (informed b
condition, age, material, and performance history) PoficV Statement
the consequence of failure (informed by criticality). is
AM1. Manage the water
where asset management becomes a decision to ther
rtfolio of assets
than simply an inventory exercise. Risk scoring ws e • •
by maintaining a complete
City to compare very different needs such as pi al, inventory and using consistent
tank rehabilitation, pump replacement, PRV upgra sing
a consistent lens. It supports predictabl etin d informationperformance, and criticality to
transparent prioritization because it provid a en . 11 guide decisions.
rationale for why a project is important is
scheduled when it is.
This framework is the operations pr licy Statement AM1, it is the mechanism that
turns service expectations into a re ble ap roach for managing infrastructure as a portfolio
of public assets, using con ' . fo tion on condition, performance, and criticality to guide
decisions. Without this s ture, i st t decisions tend to become reactive, fragmented, and
less strategic, especially i buildou ommunity where renewal needs will grow steadily year over
year.
RISK-BASED REINVESTMENT ATEGY FOR A BUILDOUT COMMUNITY
As Southlake nears buildout, reinvestment 5 Very High :High
0:becomes the primary driver of long-term LIKELIIHOODriD
capital need. The most cost-effective time 4 High
MQerate
to address a risk is often before it becomes
a failure especially when failures involve Moderate P,
emergency excavation, traffic impacts,
property restoration, water loss, and
service interruptions that erode customer
confidence. In a mature system, the
question is not whether renewal is needed;
it is how to sequence renewal in a way that 9i
protects service, reduces disruptions, and 1 Insignificant I 2 Minor 3 Moderate 4 Major 5 Severe
supports affordability. CONSEQUENCE OF FAILURE
A risk-based reinvestment strategy focuses 40 Low Priority . Moderate Priority • High Priority
on the assets that present the greatest combination of failure likelihood and consequence. For
Southlake,this aligns directly with the performance findings from Chapter 5: peak-hour vulnerabilities,
localized pressure constraints, and operational flexibility are influenced by where the network is
constrained and where redundancy is limited. A risk-based approach allows the City to prioritize
projects that improve performance outcomes such as reducing headloss in critical corridors,
strengthening looping where constraints exist, and renewing the oldest and most undersized
segments that present increasing failure risk rather than distributing investments evenly across
the city without regard to system function. This is
the reinvestment discipline that Policy Statement
AM2 establishes: focusing renewal efforts where PolicIt Statement
constraints and age-related risk are greatest, and
addressing those conditions before they become AM2. Prioritize long-term
failures. and reinvestment as Southlake approaches
buildout
Risk-based reinvestment also supports a more the oldest and un' "
predictable capital program. Rather than applicable and addressing
relying on sporadic large projects, the City can constrain, before they become
establish renewal "programs" (e.g., targeted main
replacement, valve and hydrant renewal, PRV
modernization, tank rehabilitation, pump renewal) tha n be s d over time based on need,
funding, and performance results. This programmati proach imp es procurement efficiency,
supports consistent construction quality, and helps e co unity experience reinvestment as an
organized effort rather than a series of emergencies.
LIFECYCLE DELIVERY PRACTICES (STAND 10 AINTAINABILITY, TOTAL COST OF
OWNERSHIP)
Asset management is only effective roj s ar elivered in a way that reduces future risk rather
than creating new maintenance dens c delivery practices emphasize standardization,
maintainability, and total cost of o ip gnizing that the lowest initial construction cost
is not always the most resp I -term choice for a public system that must perform for
decades.
Standardization supports bility reducing variability across the system. Standard details
and equipment types simplif er ons, reduce spare parts complexity, improve staff familiarity,
and accelerate repair response. ndardization also strengthens quality control and reduces the
likelihood of inconsistent installations that shorten asset life.
Maintainability ensures assets can be serviced and repaired efficiently and safely. This includes
practical considerations such as access, isolation valve placement, clear instrumentation, and design
choices that reduce downtime. In a buildout community, maintainability is a service issue: assets
that are difficult to isolate or repair often result in larger shutdown areas, longer outages, and
greater disruption.
Total cost of ownership ties directly to financial PolicI6 Statement
stewardship. Lifecycle thinking considers the full cost of
an asset including design, construction, operation, energy AM3. Plan and deliver capital - •
use, inspections, repairs, and eventual replacement. Using renewal projects using lifecycle
this approach consistently improves budgeting accuracy thinking by evaluating long-term
and supports more defensible investment decisions, performance, maintainability, - •
because it explains why certain choices cost more upfront total cost of ownership from design
but reduce long-term risk, energy cost, and disruption. ' •
WATER MASTER PLAN
These lifecycle practices are the direct implementation mechanism for Policy Statement AM3,
ensuring that capital and renewal projects are planned and delivered with lifecycle thinking that
evaluates long-term performance, maintainability, and total cost of ownership from design through
replacement,so that reinvestment dollars create lasting reliability rather than inadvertently increasing
long-term operating costs or renewal frequency.
OPERATIONS, MAINTENANCE, AND RENEWAL COORDINATION
A core benefit of asset management is improved coordination between day-to-day operations and
long-term capital planning. In many utilities, these functions can become disconnected: operations
staff respond to breaks and immediate needs, while capital planning focuses on larger projects.
Asset management bridges that gap by turning operational data such as break history, work orders,
recurring maintenance issues, customer complaints, and pressure fluctuations into actionable signals
that inform renewal priorities.
For Southlake,this coordination is especially important because th system must remain reliable while
the City undertakes planned reinvestment across a built-out munity. Coordinating operations
and renewal reduces repeat disruptions by aligning repairs scheduled capital work, bundling
related improvements,and choosing construction sequenci th inimizes neighborhood impacts.
It also supports better communication because staff ca ovide cl r expectations when renewal
is planned rather than reactive.
Operational coordination also supports more efficie dgeting. When the City can anticipate
renewal needs based on condition and risk tre it can r ce "surprise" costs and avoid unplanned
expenditures that disrupt budget stability. t nables a more predictable renewal
cadence one that can be communicated as pa f rent stewardship program.
DATA AND TECHNOLOGY ENABL N ASS DECISION SUPPORT)
A modern asset management pro p n data that is accurate, connected, and usable.
Southlake already has stron da s through GIS, SCADA, and operational records, but the
long-term value comes fr inte tin ese systems so that asset decisions are consistently
supported by the best ilable in ma Ion. This is particularly important in a mature system,
where proactive renewal nds on ing able to detect patterns early, recurring breaks, pressure
sensitivity, tank turnover co ns d valve operability issues before they escalate into service
disruptions. That capacity for e detection and informed response is the operational foundation
that Policy Statement DT1 establishes as essential to improving reliability and efficiency.
Data enablement supports three practical outcomes:
VISIBILITY. SCADA and telemetry provide real-time insight into pressures, tank levels, pump
performance, and key operational indicators. Improved monitoring including PRV performance
data and expanded facility condition monitoring strengthens situational awareness during peak
demand and outages.
TARGETED PRIORITIZATION. When GIS, work order history, and performance data are connected, the
City can correlate failure patterns with asset characteristics such as age, material, location, and
operational stress. This strengthens risk scoring and improves the accuracy of renewal planning.
ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY. Data enables the City to track progress against defined metrics
such as water loss trends, renewal rates, inspection completion, response times, and project
delivery outcomes and to communicate those results clearly to leadership and the community.
This directly supports the plan's emphasis on transparent, customer-focused stewardship.
ORDINANCE NO. 1032A I ADOPTED
Asset Type Required Inventory Fields Condition Indicators Performance Fields
GIs ID; Location; Diameter; Break/Leak History; Repair Frequency; pressure Complaints;Service Interrup-
Material; Install Year(or Vintage); Soil Corrosivity(if available);
Water Mains Length; Connectivity/Node Inspection Results(if applicable); Work
Fire Flow Deficiency Association;
(Distribution) IDs; Pressure Plane; Ownership; Pressure Transient Flags;Age-based Work Order Cost/Time; Customer
Impacts(#accounts)
Easement/ROW Risk Proxy
GIs ID; Location; Diameter; Condition Assessment Results; Criticality Score;Outage Consequence
Transmission Material; Install Year; Length; Coating/Lining Status; Leak Detection Notes; Pressure Zone Impacts;
Mains Critical Crossings; Connectivity; Findings;Corrosion Data; Repair Emergency Repair Duration;
Isolation Valves; Redundancy Path History;Age-based Risk Proxy Coordination with Mobility Projects
GIS ID; Location; Size;Type; Install Exercise Frequency;Operability Isolation Time Metrics; Customer
Valves Impact When Inoperable;Work
Year;Turn Direction;Associated Status; Leakage/Seat Condition;
(Isolation) Main IDs;Accessibility Notes Maintenance History; Failure Events Orders/Costs; Emergency Response
Notes
GIS ID; Location;Type; Install Hydrant Inspection Results; Fire Flow Performance Category;
Year;Associated Main Size; Maintenance History; Flow Test g y'
Hydrants Serviceability Rate;Work Orders/
Hydrant Lead Size; Flow Test Results; Repairs/Replacements;
Costs; Response Time to Repairs
History Link Operability
Meter ID;Address/Service Accuracy Test Results; Replacem Billing Adjustments;Customer
Meters Location;Size;Type; Install Year; Cycle Status;Tamper/Failure F Complaints;Apparent Loss Indicators;
(Customer) Technology(AMI/AMR);Account Continuous Flow Alerts(if av le) Read Success Rate
Link
PRVs/ Facility ID; Location;Type; Pressure Stability Metrics; Low-
Inspection Results;Set n Drift;
Pressure Setpoints; Install Year; Upstream/ Ves
ssure Event Association;Work
Control Downstream Zones; B Valve Wear Indicato aintenance
Bypass Frequency; Failur nts ers/Costs;Operational Constraints
Facilities Valves;SCADA Link
Facility ID; Location;Service Area/ Run-Time Hours; ti ondition Downtime Hours; Capacity Availability;
Pressure Plane; Pump Types; Monitoring; Efficien dsI
Pump Stations Design Capacity; Install Year; Mainten a Logs; Ma omponent Peak Hour Performance; Energy Use
Redundancy(N+1);SCADA Link Age; Fa ry Intensity; Emergency Response Notes
Tank ID; Location;Capacity; Inspectio epor g ondition;
Ground Install Year;Coatings; Inlet/ Sediment atio dicators; Turnover/Water Age Proxy;
Storage Tanks Outlet Configuration; Mixing (ifpeakage;
ment; Maintenance Operational Range; Outage
applicable);SCADA Link Consequence;Work Orders/Costs
Tank ID; Location;Capacity; s;Structural Pressure Stabilization Role;Turnover/
Elevated Elevation; Install Year;Coatin g Condition; Water Age Proxy; Emergency Storage
Storage Tanks Overflow Elevation; Pressure ance History Availability;Outage Impacts
Plane;SCADA Link
Figu 4: mum Asset Data Standards
Technology enablement is th for t an "extra." It is a PolicI6 Statement
core implementation tool that rs on the disciplined
data management and modern operational tools that ' reliability
Policy Statement DT1 calls for making decision-making efficiency data
more consistent, measurable, and defensible, and management and modernoperational
ensuring the City can act on emerging issues before they tools that supportdetection,
become service failures. informed prioritization, and
k L_ corrective action.
38 WATER MASTER PLAN I timely
4
"m
lG
4 ^I..
z �► °' p� —
1 r
Y
.o
w�
' a
ty t t a t
r
Y f
Water conservation is a core utility strategy bec e it red uc voidable demand, preserves
capacity in pipes, pump stations, and storage, and i oves he City perational flexibility during
high-demand periods. In a community like Southla a argely built-out and characterized by
seasonal outdoor irrigation peaks, conservation is not ly a "messaging program." It is a system
management tool that helps sustain pressur bility, intain fire protection margins, reduce
wear on mechanical equipment during peak e a potentially defer or right-size future
capital investments. Conservation also suppo I - affordability: the most cost-effective
gallon is often the gallon not purchas pe ored, and delivered.
This Water Master Plan establishes nda i for a comprehensive, modern conservation and
demand stewardship progr a with State requirements and reflects the community's
expectations for high sere quali id ng stewardship. The intent is not to replace operations
manuals or create every edure in this document; rather, the intent is to define the program
framework, the rationale, a the p y direction that will guide implementation, budgeting, and
performance reporting over ti I is plan, conservation is treated as an integrated component of
system performance, directly I to levels of service (pressure, reliability, responsiveness), asset
management (reducing stress and extending useful life), and the City's broader strategic goals.
WHY CONSERVATION STILL MATTERS AT BUILDOUT
As Southlake approaches buildout, conservation becomes more—not less—important. In a mature
system, reliability is increasingly shaped by peak conditions rather than long-term growth. The
Water Master Plan evaluation shows that peak hour and maximum day conditions create the greatest
operational stress on pumping, storage recovery, and pressure performance. That stress is driven
largely by outdoor irrigation patterns, which are highly variable and concentrated in time. Even if
annual demand remains stable, peak demand can dictate the infrastructure and operational margin
the City must maintain to protect service expectations.
Conservation therefore functions as demand stewardship: a practical strategy to reduce avoidable
peaks, improve operational flexibility, and protect service outcomes during the most demanding
periods. Smoother peaks help the system maintain stable pressures, preserve emergency reserves,
and reduce the intensity of daily tank drawdown and recovery cycles. Over time, that reduces
WATER MASTER PLAN
wear on pumps, reduces energy costs associated with high-demand operations, and supports
long-term asset life by limiting pressure swings and high-flow stress in critical corridors. Achieving
these outcomes requires conservation to be more than a regulatory obligation it must be a shared
community value, reinforced through education, practical guidance, and clear expectations, which
is exactly the culture that Policy Statement CD1 directs the City to advance.
Conservation also supports financial stewardship. Southlake purchases treated water from
a wholesale provider, which means avoidable use carries direct cost implications in addition
to operational impacts. By reducing waste and moderating peak demand, the City can protect
affordability by limiting purchased-water costs, avoiding reactive repair costs associated with peak
stress events, and better aligning capital timing with verified need. This is why the Water Master Plan
frames conservation as a continuous utility practice
supported by customer tools, measurable outcomes,
and community partnerships not as an episodic effort " •
that is only emphasized during drought restrictions.
Regulatory framework and State requirements.
Southlake's conservation program is shaped by
State expectations administered through the Texas
Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ)
including requirements tied to water conservat"
planning, drought contingency preparedness,
water loss reporting. Because Southlake purchases it
treated water supply from the City of Fort the s also required to adopt and maintain
conservation standards that meet or exceed) e im requirements Fort Worth establishes
as a condition of that wholesale supply relations an Southlake's conservation program must
remain aligned with a regional framew is s ect to change as Fort Worth responds to evolving
statewide supply conditions. Mai inin egul ry alignment matters because conservation
requirements increasingly influen ho ities demonstrate reliability, stewardship, and
readiness under constrained statew ater su ply conditions. State requirements also reinforce
the need for documentatio e t, and continuous improvement: successful conservation
programs are defined by taine u n in avoidable waste and measurable shifts in demand
patterns, not only by tern ary rest tions during drought.
PROGRAM FOUNDATIONS A MUNITY TOOLS
A durable conservation program is built on clarity, convenience, and consistency. Residents are
most likely to adopt efficient practices when expectations are easy to understand, the "how-to"
guidance is practical, and support is available before enforcement becomes necessary. The City's
prior conservation efforts recognized that outreach is one of the most cost-effective strategies
when it is tailored to local conditions and delivered through multiple channels. This Water Master
Plan expands that approach into a modern program framework organized around four foundational
pillars:
Community culture and awareness - Make efficient use the local norm through consistent
messaging, seasonal reminders, and clear standards.
Practical customer tools and support - Provide help that residents can apply immediately:
irrigation guidance, troubleshooting steps, and access to support.
Efficiency expectations - Clearly communicate watering rules, peak-season guidance, and what
"good practice" looks like.
ORDINANCE NO. 1032A I ADOPTED
Accountability through measurement and targeted follow-up - Use data to focus attention where
it yields the highest benefit and document outcomes over time.
This foundation is intentionally designed to support the plan's policy direction. A conservation-
first culture is built through consistent education and transparent expectations. An education-first
approach paired with clear standards reduces avoidable waste while preserving trust. A partnership-
forward model recognizes that many irrigation and landscape decisions are influenced by HOAs,
property managers, and service providers—so citywide outcomes improve when these groups are
active partners rather than passive recipients of enforcement.
Community tools. To make conservation achievable and customer-friendly, the City's program
should include a suite of tools that can be accessed quickly and updated seasonally. Examples
include:
1. A simple "watering season playbook" (what changes by month, recommended controller
settings, cycle-and-soak guidance)
2. A "quick check" irrigation troubleshooting guide (broke eads, overspray, runoff, incorrect
zones)
3. Leak awareness guidance and how to interpret une ain ncreases in water use
4. A central online hub that houses rules, tips, FAQ d seas updates
S. Customer support pathways (how to request tan e, how t eport issues, how follow-up
occurs)
TARGETING AVOIDABLE USE
Modern conservation programs are most effe 've hey focus on avoidable use, the waste
that can be reduced without compro g p health, safety, or quality-of-life outcomes. In
Southlake, avoidable use is most of ass iate ith seasonal outdoor irrigation and preventable
losses such as leaks and malfunc ping s. ecause peak demand is the primary driver of
system stress, the most valuable co io tegies are those that reduce peak-day and peak-
hour spikes and prevent wat fr ontinuing unnoticed.
Leak awareness and d nd inte y. onservation includes reducing avoidable system and
customer-side losses. Lea arene is a high-value strategy because it prevents waste, reduces
customer impacts, and supp a stewardship by reducing the conditions that can contribute
to breaks and emergency repair modern approach includes consistent workflows for responding
to unusual usage patterns, clear customer education on common leak indicators, and coordinated
follow-up when patterns suggest meter or service line issues. Over time, these practices should be
linked to the City's asset management program so loss patterns can inform renewal priorities and
condition trends.
Outdoor irrigation practices (highest impact for peak demand). Outdoor efficiency is typically
the largest opportunity to reduce avoidable peak demand. In Southlake, that means focusing on
irrigation scheduling, system maintenance, and distribution efficiency. The most effective messaging
is practical: it emphasizes healthy landscape outcomes (deep, infrequent watering; corrected
distribution; seasonal adjustments) rather than framing conservation as landscape sacrifice. Priority
practices include:
• Clear watering schedule guidance and seasonal controller adjustments
• Promoting cycle-and-soak to reduce runoff and overspray
• Encouraging routine "sprinkler system checkups" at the start of peak season
• Helping customers identify broken heads and misaligned sprays
WATER MASTER PLAN
I Illi
mammon
x.
-d
'ems ihIt"X Y R WC3 s 0.-. ` — 1 `.3 / y J�
�4 1 ii1II
ypcy wyy116,
• Guidance for large landscapes (HOAs and Policy Statement
commercial sites) where small improvements yield
large demand reductions CD2. , before
e nforceme, by emphasizing outreach,
Customer support tools and modern outreach. jaching, and voluntary compliance,
program should increasingly leverage pro ctivk and using enforcement
targeted outreach rather than relying only road backstop - protect
messaging. Targeted notifications and usage s mmunity water stewardship ' '
where available through billing data, AMI, or a ly ,
allow the City to contact customers e hen terns suggest leaks or unusually high irrigation
use. This approach reflects the ed ion- st p sophy that Policy Statement CD2 establishes:
outreach, coaching, and voluntar mpl, e primary tools, with enforcement reserved as
a measured backstop when needed tect munity water stewardship goals. Prioritizing this
sequence improves outcom us er satisfaction — helping residents avoid unexpected bills
and correct problems earl hile p er the collaborative relationship between the City and its
customers that makes c rvation hared value rather than a regulatory burden.
PARTNERSHIPS (HOAS, PR MANAGERS, REGIONAL COORDINATION)
Partnerships are essential in Southlake because many water use decisions are influenced by
community standards and third-party service providers. HOA landscape expectations, contracted
irrigators, and property managers often set the default irrigation practices applied across hundreds
of properties. For that reason, community-wide efficiency improves when these groups are engaged
as partners and provided with practical tools, not only notified when violations occur.
HOAs and common-area irrigation (high leverage). HOA common areas represent an especially high-
impact category because a relatively small number of irrigation systems can account for substantial
peak demand. A structured HOA engagement program can include:
• Seasonal HOA briefings (pre-summer and mid-season)
• Template communications for newsletters and neighborhood messaging
• "Irrigation best practices" toolkits for HOA landscape vendors
• Coordination on community-wide watering schedule reminders
• Recognition programs for efficient common-area practices
Commercial and institutional partners. Large landscapes
and centrally managed irrigation systems offer high PoficI6 Statement
opportunity for peak reduction through improved
scheduling and maintenance. Targeted engagement CD3.
can include checklists, seasonal controller guidance, outcomes by leveraging tools
and property manager outreach that makes efficiency partnerships such as customer usage
easy to implement at scale. insights, early anomaly notifications,
collaborationand •
Regional coordination. Although Southlake purchases property managers to
reduce
treated water from the City of Fort Worth, regional avoidable
conditions still matter especially during drought and
peak seasons. Coordination with regional partners and
the wholesale provider supports shared awareness of peak demand periods, operational readiness,
and consistent public messaging when regional supply conditions require heightened conservation
measures. Taken together, these partnerships combined with customer usage insights, early anomaly
notifications, and direct engagement with HOAs and property anagers represent the practical
toolkit that Policy Statement CD3 directs the City to leverag order to strengthen conservation
outcomes and reduce avoidable waste at scale.
AQUIFERS, WELLS, AND REGIONAL STEWARDSHIP
Although Southlake's municipal supply is deliver e hr gh wholesale surface water, regional
groundwater resources remain important for planning a ublic communication. The City is located
over the Trinity Aquifer, a major aquifer, ide by t exas Water Development Board. The
Trinity Aquifer is composed of multiple Ovate ea ni ithin the Trinity Group and extends
across broad areas of North and Central Tex a er lity varies across the aquifer, and total
Mo C k G a L
Outcrop
Jack D nt
Subsurface
II ,
F-ck-11-1
Palo aulman Cooke Lamar Red River
h o
Taylor all Erath me a derson Denton N
0
7 Hunt 1
Bro 50
Rock
L a mestone wall Miles
s
Tarrant
lie
11 _ Kaufman outcrop(unconfined)
Milam subcrop(confined) John
II n
Lee Navarro
K Bastrop
Real Caldwell t
Guadalu McLennan
Uvalde i B
Atascosa
0 20 40 80 120
Miles
Figure 7-1: Trinity Aquifer Figure 7-2: Woodbine Aquifer
44 WATER MASTER PLAN I SOUTHLAKE COMPREHENSIVE
WATER MASTER PLAN
dissolved solids and salinity generally increase with depth, with larger historical water level declines
occurring in portions of Texas where municipal pumping has been significant though declines have
moderated in some areas as suppliers increased reliance on surface water.
Southlake is also located within the Woodbine Aquifer, a minor aquifer that overlies the Trinity
and includes multiple sandstone-bearing zones. Woodbine water quality and yield vary by depth,
with fresher water typically occurring at shallower depths and higher salinity occurring deeper. The
Woodbine has historically served municipal, industrial, domestic, and small irrigation needs, and
some historic declines associated with concentrated pumping have moderated as suppliers shifted
to surface water sources.
Including this groundwater context supports a key practical message: regional water stewardship
is shared, even when supply sources differ. During prolonged hot seasons and drought conditions,
customer behavior can shift, private well use may increase in some areas, and regional supply systems
experience higher stress. Southlake's conservation messaging should therefore remain focused on
efficient irrigation and leak prevention regardless of source, be se reducing avoidable demand
benefits the broader region and supports long-term resilienc
MEASURING PROGRESS
A conservation program becomes durable when it ea orable an reported consistently. This
Water Master Plan establishes the expectation that t e's conservation program will mature
from baseline measurement into ongoing perform anc orting that is aligned with the Strategic
Management System. The goal is to track es th eflect both customer experience and
system performance—so leadership and the n see what is working, what needs
adjustment, and where investments produce m s lue.
KPIs should be designed to track t typ of p ress:
1. Demand outcomes - wheth e is moderating and avoidable use is declining.
2. Program outcomes - er treach, tools, and partnerships are producing behavior
change and resolvi ssues ly.
3. System stewards h utcome whether water loss is decreasing and peak stress is being
reduced in ways that port set life and affordability.
Example KPI categories include:
• Seasonal peak indicators (maximum day and peak hour trends)
• Unaccounted-for water/non-revenue water trends and response rates
• Number of high-usage anomalies identified and resolved
• Irrigation-related outreach reach and follow-up effectiveness
• Repeat violation rates (education-first success measure)
• Participation levels in HOA/property manager partnership activities
• Internal "City as a model" measures for municipal facilities(optional but valuable for credibility)
Performance reporting should be structured around an annual cycle: pre-season program readiness,
peak-season monitoring and targeted outreach, and post-season evaluation to adjust the next year's
approach. This continuous improvement loop strengthens results without requiring new regulations
each year and builds trust by demonstrating that the program is fair, data-informed, and focused
on measurable outcomes.
ORDINANCE NO. 1032A I ADOPTED
CS\V
•
Southlake's water system is a shared public asse at mus ably serve today's customers
while accommodating remaining infill, redevelopme nd long-te land use outcomes. As the
community approaches buildout, the City's challen le s out adding new systemwide capacity
and more about protecting the performance and re of existing infrastructure. Growth still
occurs through redevelopment, commercial r vestme nd targeted infill but it must occur in a
way that is compatible with the water system to twin pressure stability, fire protection
readiness, operational flexibility, and water ali chapter describes how the City will
coordinate development activity with I rang tem planning so that new projects support not
strain the reliability that residents a us sse pect.
This chapter also clarifies the "sys role of development coordination. In a mature
community, the primary risk ' t t growth will overwhelm the system in the aggregate, but
that localized developme mp c shift costs and service risk onto existing residents if
capacity, looping, press plane c id e ations, and fire flow readiness are not evaluated early
and addressed appropriat The W r Master Plan provides a consistent framework for ensuring
that development decisions ain gned with long-range performance goals, asset management
practices, and coordinated cap elivery across utilities and streets.
DEVELOPMENT COMPATIBILITY AND SYSTEM CAPACITY
Development in Southlake must be compatible with the City's ability to sustain reliable service
outcomes across the existing system. Compatibility means more than confirming that a project can
connect to a pipe of sufficient size; it means verifying that the project will not create localized pressure
instability, reduce fire protection margins, or limit operational flexibility during peak demand and
outage conditions. This is especially important in a near-buildout community where performance
constraints are more likely to be localized—driven by elevation, pressure plane boundaries, network
headloss, and the timing of demand—rather than by a citywide shortage of supply.
A core principle of system protection is that new development should not shift service risk or
reinvestment costs onto existing residents and Policy Statement GD1 makes that principle a formal
requirement by directing the City to ensure that growth demonstrates compatibility with system
capacity, operational needs, and long-term maintainability before those costs and risks can fall on
the community. When development occurs in areas with constrained looping, limited redundancy, or
known peak-hour vulnerabilities, the City must ensure that appropriate improvements are identified
WATER MASTER PLAN
early and integrated into project planning. This may include main upsizing, looping connections,
valve improvements, PRV adjustments, or other targeted measures needed to preserve level-of-
service expectations. When improvement needs are identified, they should be clearly documented
through development agreements and engineering plan review so that responsibilities and timing
are transparent and defensible.
Equally important is timing. Even when long-term system planning indicates that capacity
is adequate overall, a project can still create short-term operational stress if it is built ahead of
supporting improvements or if it concentrates demand in a sensitive area. Therefore, development
compatibility is evaluated not only based on "end state" conditions, but also based on near-term
operational realities and the City's ability to maintain service during construction, transition periods,
and peak seasons.
Poficy Statement Poficy Statement
GD1. Require new development GD2. En, re that water infrastructure
and redevelopment to demonstrate associat, J with development is planned,
compatibility with the City's water system des; 1,i.- ' and constructed to support
capacity, operational needs, and long- lifec-cie per, -mance and City maintenance
term maintainability so growth does not andards, h. luding coordination with
shift avoidable risk or cost onto existing ing-rrige systL-m plans and reinvestment
priorities.
DEVELOPMENT INFRASTRUCTURE STAND LI CYCLE PERFORMANCE
Southlake's long-term reliability depe t on n what is built, but on how it is built. In a mature
community, the City's infrastructur rtfo is al dy extensive; each new segment of pipe, valve,
PRV improvement, meter, or cont evi part of that long-term maintenance obligation.
Design and construction standards ore se e a system protection function by ensuring that
new infrastructure support e formance, can be maintained efficiently, and does not
introduce avoidable varia y that re s cost and reduces reliability.
Maintainability is a centra pect on. Infrastructure should be designed so that it can be
isolated, accessed, and repa hout creating unnecessary service disruption. In practical
terms, maintainability includes ughtful valve placement and spacing, accessible facilities and
appurtenances, appropriate bypass provisions where needed, and construction approaches that
reduce future repair complexity. The goal is to avoid designs that may work on paper but create
operational burdens that persist for decades.
Standardization supports reliability and cost control by reducing system complexity. When materials
and appurtenances vary too widely, it increases spare parts requirements, training burden, and repair
time during emergencies. Consistent standards and approved materials also strengthen quality
control and reduce the likelihood of premature failures due to inconsistent installation practices.
Lifecycle performance expectations align development and capital delivery with the City's asset
management framework. When infrastructure is designed with long-term performance and total
cost of ownership in mind, it reduces the frequency of failures, improves operational efficiency,
and supports more predictable budgeting. These expectations also help ensure that improvements
required through development agreements are compatible with the City's long-range reinvestment
program and do not create future renewal challenges. Taken together, these standards reflect the
direction of Policy Statement GD2, ensuring that water infrastructure associated with development
is planned, designed, and constructed to support lifecycle performance and City maintenance
standards, in coordination with long-range system plans and reinvestment priorities.
COORDINATING WATER WITH WASTEWATER AND STORMWATER
Water infrastructure decisions do not occur in isolation. Mobility projects, street rehabilitation,
redevelopment activity,and utility reinvestment all intersect in the same corridors,and uncoordinated
delivery means repeat construction impacts, multiple pavement cuts, and serial disruptions that
erode customer confidence. When projects are coordinated, the City reduces total disruption,
improves cost efficiency, and delivers better outcomes for residents and businesses.
This Water Master Plan is designed to align with the City's wastewater and stormwater master plans
so that infrastructure work can be sequenced and staged strategically. Coordination opportunities
include overlapping renewal corridors, joint sequencing to minimize rework and restoration costs,
and stormwater improvements where drainage conditions influence trench stability or construction
staging particularly in redevelopment areas where timing windows are narrow.
Coordination also improves constructability and system pr ction by reducing utility conflicts,
maintaining service continuity during construction, and i a clearer communication plan
for affected residents and businesses. Over time, thi trengt the City's ability to deliver
reinvestment programs efficiently and maintain publi St.
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW AND ONGOING PLAN CO NCY
A master plan only creates value when it is onsi tly. Southlake's Water Master Plan is
intended to be an active decision-support I , o ms day-to-day development review,
operational planning, and capital progr ing ydr ulic model and the performance findings
documented in Chapter 5 provide t ical sis for determining where capacity margins are
tight, where pressure plane oper s ar ensi , and where targeted reinvestment is needed
to protect service expectations. c blishes how those insights translate into daily
decision points particularly d ' d pment review and redevelopment coordination.
Development review is o of the s st important implementation levers because it is where
long-range expectations ome pr ct-specific requirements. The City's review process should
ensure that:
• Water service and fire prote readiness are verified early, not after design is complete;
• Required improvements are clearly defined and integrated into agreements and plan approvals;
• New infrastructure is designed to City standards that support maintainability and Iifecycle
performance; and
• As-built information is captured and integrated into the City's GIS, asset inventory, and hydraulic
model so the plan remains current.
Maintaining plan consistency also requires regular updates and feedback loops. As development
patterns change, as new data becomes available, and as projects are delivered, the City should
update relevant plan inputs—such as demand allocation assumptions, model datasets, asset
condition information, and operational protocols. This is how the Water Master Plan remains a living
framework rather than a snapshot in time. It also supports transparency: when the City can show
that decisions are grounded in consistent standards and updated system information, development
coordination becomes more predictable for applicants and more strategic for the community.
i
1
'.r„ T 4W
14 _ !.
r
r-
I _
1
L•OUTHL
J
Y mom ra
rh rnsieIar�
I
6.
_ r
' • Jfl �6
L•L
i - Y
-�`
y '
T�
r�
p
MEW
•
rqJW
.4
A jag
CHAPTER
•
: COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT,
PARTNERSHIPS, ANDFUNDING
14
Delivering reliable water service in a near-bu ut commu requires more than sound
infrastructure it requires an ongoing practice of mm ation, coordination, and disciplined
reinvestment. Unlike growth-era infrastructure, whi ften visible through new construction,
long-term stewardship is defined by the less vi le work aintaining pressure reliability, renewing
aging assets before failures occur, protectin enc diness, and coordinating projects in
a way that minimizes disruption. For the co u se outcomes are experienced through
consistency: steady service, clear expe ons, ly response when issues arise, and confidence
that public funds are being used res si
This chapter provides the imple t e between the Water Master Plan's technical
findings and the day-to-day rn e required to carry them forward. It describes how the
City will communicate abo sys st rdship, partner with regional and internal stakeholders,
align funding and budg g with li ycI needs, and deliver a coordinated Capital Improvement
Program (CIP). It also rein es that gagement and funding are not one-time plan activities they
are ongoing operating practi th ustain trust and support predictable reinvestment over time.
ENGAGEMENT AS AN ONGOIN OPERATING PRACTICE
In a community approaching buildout, the most important infrastructure decisions are often those
that prevent problems before they occur. This reality can make reinvestment harder to communicate
because the public often sees success as the absence of disruption. A strong engagement practice
bridges that gap by helping residents understand what reliable service requires, how the City defines
and measures performance, and why planned reinvestment is more cost-effective than emergency
repairs.
The Water Master Plan is designed to support a clear "service expectations" conversation. It
connects system performance findings to measurable outcomes—such as pressure stability during
peak conditions, operational flexibility during outages, and readiness for emergency demand—so
the community can understand what the City is managing toward. When residents know what the
City is trying to achieve, reinvestment is easier to discuss as a disciplined, ongoing responsibility
rather than a response to failure.
WATER MASTER PLAN
Messaging themes: what residents can expect. An effective communication approach is consistent
and practical. The City's messaging should emphasize outcomes residents experience directly:
• Dependable service as the baseline. Water service should feel stable and consistent, including
during seasonal peak demand periods.
• Planned reinvestment reduces disruption. Proactive renewal reduces emergency breaks,
unexpected outages, and costly reactive repairs.
• Clear notice and coordination during construction. When work is planned, residents and
businesses should receive timely, predictable information about impacts and schedules.
• Stewardship is measurable. The City will track progress and report on outcomes so the
community can see what is improving and why.
Communication methods. The City's engagement approach should use multiple channels and match
the message to the moment. Examples include:
• Seasonal peak-demand and conservation communic (pre-summer and mid-summer)
• Construction notices tailored to neighborhoods busine rridors
• Annual "state of the system" reporting tied t udg IP discussions
• Web-based dashboards or fact sheets that expl einvestment priorities and progress
• Coordination with HOAs and property fo h-leverage areas
Engagement is also a customer serv' ol. communication reduces confusion, improves
compliance when restrictions are ded, nd ngthens trust during construction. Over time,
consistent engagement supports t Ian' e bjectives: better understanding of reinvestment
needs, smoother project delivery, ro public confidence in long-range infrastructure
stewardship.
PARTNERSHIPS
Water reliability depends on d' ion beyond the City's utility boundaries. Southlake purchases
treated water from the City of Worth, maintains emergency intertie capability, and operates
within regional conditions that influence peak season readiness and drought response. In a near-
buildout system, partnerships become increasingly important because resiliency is often defined by
how quickly the City can respond to changing conditions such as supply interruptions, maintenance
outages, extreme weather events, or regional demand stress.
Regional coordination. The City's partnership posture includes:
• Wholesale supplier coordination. Regular communication with Fort Worth regarding
delivery pressures, seasonal peak readiness, maintenance planning, and long-range demand
assumptions.
• Interconnect coordination. Maintaining clear operating protocols with neighboring utilities,
including periodic exercising/testing, verification of capacity, and clear points of contact
during emergencies.
• Peak season and drought coordination. Alignment on public messaging, supply constraints,
and operational readiness during high-risk periods.
ORDINANCE NO. 1032A I ADOPTED
These partnerships support resiliency in practical ways: better information, faster response during
disruptions, and clearer communication to the public when regional conditions influence local
operations.
Internal coordination. Within the City, utility work intersects with streets, redevelopment, mobility
projects, stormwater improvements, emergency management, and capital delivery practices.
Strong internal coordination reduces repeat disruption, improves cost efficiency, and strengthens
deliverability. It also supports better customer outcomes: fewer pavement cuts, better sequencing,
and more predictable schedules.
Coordination practices that support delivery include:
• Shared corridor planning and look-ahead scheduling across departments
• Utility coordination during redevelopment review and capital project scoping
• Joint construction sequencing to minimize repeat impacts
• Emergency management integration for critical facility diness and response protocols
FUNDING STRATEGY OVERVIEW
Sustaining a reliable water system at buildout requi a fu ing stra gy built around predictable
reinvestment. As the system matures, the City's 'ta eds increasingly reflect replacement
and rehabilitation rather than expansion. Without a to erm reinvestment posture, costs tend to
become more volatile spiking when failures and ng emergency projects that are often
more expensive, more disruptive, and harder t c a communicate.
A sound funding strategy links four el
1. Service expectations (wha e sy m m deliver, including peak-season reliability and
emergency readiness)
2. Asset lifecycle needs u e renewed, when, and at what risk if deferred)
3. Capital programmi (the p ct n that sequences reinvestment responsibly)
4. Financial tools (rat ees, res es, and funding sources that support delivery)
Aligning these four elements t budgets, reserves, rates, and capital planning reflect actual
lifecycle needs and long-term ser ce expectations rather than near-term minimums is the financially
resilient and transparent approach that Policy Statement FS1 directs the City to maintain. This plan's
emphasis on asset management strengthens funding decisions by providing clearer justification for
reinvestment timing and by allowing projects to be prioritized based on risk, performance, and
lifecycle value. It also improves transparency by providing a consistent explanation for why certain
investments occur ahead of visible failures, because they reduce long-term costs and protect service
outcomes.
Policy Statement Policy Statement
FS1. Fund the water utility in a financially FS2. Treat renewal . replacement
ongoingresilient and transparent manner by planned, obligation
aligning budgets, . into annual planning so the system remains
WATER MASTER PLAN
v�% V
Statement Date
eat E c
o. pedoa St
Account N �t ON16t
Account Name pet gta >j3
."oss _t lSl
Transparency: connecting "what we pay for"to tc sustainable utility funding model is most
durable when the public can see the c tion een cost and value. Residents and businesses
should be able to understand:
• What investments are bein ade
• How investments protec relic and reduce emergency disruptions
• How the City priorit pr is and consistently
• How reinvestmen ports to -term affordability by avoiding more expensive failures
FINANCIAL GOVERNANCE OUNTABILITY
Financial sustainability is not achieved through a single rate decision; it is achieved through
a consistent governance practice that maintains reinvestment discipline over time. In a near-
buildout system, a common risk is allowing renewal to become episodic, addressing needs only
when they become urgent, because that creates budget volatility and increases long-term cost.
Policy Statement FS2 directly addresses this risk by establishing renewal and replacement as a
planned, ongoing obligation integrated into annual planning, so the system remains dependable
without relying on crisis-driven spending. This Water Master Plan supports that approach through
predictable reinvestment informed by risk, performance outcomes, and long-range asset lifecycle
planning.
Affordability awareness. Affordability does not mean underinvesting; it means managing costs
predictably and transparently so residents are not exposed to sudden spikes created by deferred
renewal and emergency replacements. Affordability is strengthened when the City:
• Establishes a renewal cadence aligned with lifecycle needs
• Uses risk-based prioritization to focus funds where they provide the greatest reliability benefit
ORDINANCE NO. . ADOPTED
• Maintains appropriate reserves to reduce emergency funding shocks
• Coordinates projects to reduce repeat restoration costs and improve efficiency
Accountability through performance reporting. The Strategic Management System provides the
City's framework for aligning goals, budgets, and measurable outcomes. The Water Master Plan fits
within that system by emphasizing measurable metrics and clear reporting. This allows leadership
and the community to track progress and evaluate whether investments are delivering intended
outcomes.
Examples of governance-aligned measures include:
• Renewal rates and progress against the Asset Management Plan
• Water loss/non-revenue water trends and resolution rates
• Break frequency trends by asset class or corridor
• CIP delivery performance (schedule and budget adhere
• Peak-season performance indicators tied to levels of e (where measurable)
wool
54 WATER MASTER PLAN
SOUTHLAKE COMPREHENSIVE
11
F �
� s _
Co m prbh6nsive PI
This chapter documents how the Water Maste Ian is anced from a drafted policy
framework into an adopted supporting element of thlake's Co ehensive Plan. Southlake's
comprehensive planning process is designed to be spa t, iterative, and community-informed.
Rather than treating adoption as a single vote at the e City uses a sequence of public meetings
to build understanding, gather feedback, and r ine plan ection before formal action is taken. This
approach helps ensure the plan reflects com rio s, aligns with related Comprehensive
Plan elements, and provides clear implements n or staff and decision-makers.
The adoption process also reinforc ity' ommitment to meaningful public involvement.
Water service is often most noti ble en c ditions change during peak summer demand
periods, infrastructure repairs, co v or localized service disruptions and residents
form impressions based on reji0i ity, munication, responsiveness, and confidence in long-term
stewardship. A structured -1 r s provides opportunities to ask questions, review plan
concepts, and provide i t in sett s signed for dialogue, not just formal hearings. Through
Corridor Planning Commi work s sions, the SPIN Town Hall Forum/Open House, Planning and
Zoning Commission review, Cit ouncil readings, the City is able to incorporate feedback while
keeping the plan grounded in o ve data, regulatory requirements, and long-term infrastructure
stewardship.
ROLE OF THE CORRIDOR PLANNING COMMITTEE IN PLAN DEVELOPMENT
As part of the Comprehensive Plan update process, the Corridor Planning Committee provided
early guidance and direction that helped shape the development of the Water Master Plan (along
with the Wastewater and Stormwater plans being updated concurrently). Committee meetings
were structured to build shared understanding, review baseline conditions, and provide policy-
level feedback that staff could translate into clear plan direction. This step is important because the
Committee's role is not to design project solutions, but to help establish priorities, expectations, and
policy choices that guide how the City manages its infrastructure over time.
The City's Comprehensive Planning webpage documents the Committee schedule and topics,
including an initial overview meeting and subsequent plan-focused meetings. The Corridor Planning
Committee meeting on January 13, 2026 (overview of the Stormwater, Water, and Wastewater
plan updates) established shared context for the comprehensive utility planning effort, and the
February 10, 2026 meeting (Water/Wastewater focus) provided direction that informed refinement
WATER MASTER PLAN
of plan chapters, policy statements, and implementation pathways. Presentation materials from
these meetings are posted online to support ongoing transparency and resident awareness.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT APPROACH AND COMMUNICATION STRATEGY
The City's engagement approach for these plan updates is built around multiple touchpoints, clear
communication, and accessible ways for residents to participate. The Comprehensive Planning
webpage emphasizes that presentation materials are posted online after meetings so residents can
stay informed even if they cannot attend in person. This Water Master Plan also supports expanding
communication beyond meetings by using consistent messages and plain-language tools that
explain service expectations, conservation and demand stewardship principles, and "what residents
can expect" during planned reinvestment and capital delivery.
A central engagement milestone for these plan updates is the SPIN Open House/Town Hall Forum on
March 2, 2026 at 5:00 p.m. in the Southlake Town Hall Council Chambers. The City's Comprehensive
Planning page notes that this open house is intended to provid sidents an opportunity to share
feedback with staff on the Water, Wastewater, and Stormwate aster Plans. This event is especially
valuable because it is designed for dialogue in a less forma g than a public hearing, allowing
staff to clarify questions, identify recurring themes, and d men ut that can be reflected in final
plan edits before adoption.
FORMAL REVIEW AND ADOPTION SCHEDULE
After incorporating Committee direction and inpu e Water Master Plan proceeds through
the City's formal adoption pathway. The antici to du for public consideration and adoption
includes:
January - April 2026 — Publi ed ck O ortunity with City staff
March 2, 2026 — SPIN Open u all Forum (public feedback opportunity)
March 5,2026—Plan o Commission meeting(formal reviewand recommendation
step)
April 7, 2026 — City ncil is eading (initial consideration)
April 21, 2026 — City Co nd Reading (final adoption consideration)
This stepwise schedule serves two purposes. First, it provides multiple opportunities for public
awareness and feedback prior to final adoption. Second, it supports good governance by ensuring
the plan is reviewed through the City's established boards and commission structure before Council
action. Planning and Zoning Commission review provides an additional public forum to evaluate
the plan's consistency with the Comprehensive Plan framework and its policy direction, while City
Council readings provide the final legislative pathway for adoption.
HOW FEEDBACK IS USED TO REFINE THE PLAN
Public engagement and board/commission review are not symbolic steps; they are intended to
improve the final document. Feedback from the Corridor Planning Committee and SPIN Open House
is used by staff to refine narrative clarity, strengthen communication tools (including conservation
and demand stewardship messaging), confirm that policy statements are supported by clear
rationale in earlier chapters, and ensure implementation pathways are understandable. Feedback
may also identify where additional graphics, maps, or plain-language explanations are needed to
make water system planning concepts accessible to residents.
The City's approach also emphasizes follow-through. Meeting materials are posted publicly, and
the plan is refined transparently so residents can see that input was received and addressed.
Where feedback reflects localized concerns such as pressure questions, water quality perceptions,
construction impacts, or conservation expectations staff use documented information such as
system performance findings, operational data, service request trends, field observations, and
technical study results to determine the most appropriate plan response. Depending on the issue,
that response may be improved communication, operational adjustments, targeted maintenance
practices, a standards/design alignment topic, a conservation program refinement, or a capital
planning consideration.
DOCUMENTATION AND ADOPTION OUTCOME
Upon adoption, the Water Master Plan becomes an adopted element supporting the City's
Comprehensive Plan and provides policy direction that guides:
1. Water service expectations and performance management practices
2. Asset management foundations and development the Water Infrastructure Asset
Management Plan
3. Conservation and demand stewardship program ection a eporting practices
4. Development coordination expectations that tec tem per ormance and maintainability
5. Long-range funding, capital planning, and partn ip strategies
Adoption also establishes a clear basis for a ou hat the City committed to do, how
progress will be tracked, and how residents ca n ed as implementation proceeds.
AFTER ADOPTION
Once adoption is completed, the Master Plan transitions from a planning document into
the City's formal policy f k water system decision-making and service delivery.
Adoption establishes an ial, Co il- gnized basis for how the City will define water service
expectations, evaluate sy perfor nce, prioritize reinvestment, and communicate consistently
with the community. It also ifies w modeling, operational data, and asset information will be
used to support decisions an the City will align water infrastructure stewardship with the
Comprehensive Plan's broader als for neighborhood stability, resilience, and quality of life. In
practical terms, adoption provides staff with clear direction to apply the plan's policy statements
when evaluating maintenance needs, capital improvement priorities, development review, and
regulatory responsibilities.
Following adoption, the City applies the plan in three primary ways. First, it becomes the guiding
reference for program implementation supporting consistent customer communication, improved
conservation and demand stewardship outreach, and clearer expectations for what residents can
anticipate during planned infrastructure work. Second, it becomes the organizing framework for
decision support and long-range planning formalizing how the City maintains and uses hydraulic
model findings, strengthens its asset inventory and condition practices, and advances the Water
Infrastructure Asset Management Plan to prioritize renewal and reinvestment. Third, it becomes the
foundation for sustainable funding and partnerships connecting documented needs (operations,
compliance, renewal, resiliency, and prioritized improvements) to transparent funding discussions
and enabling coordinated delivery with wastewater, stormwater, streets, and redevelopment so the
community experiences fewer repeat disruptions and more predictable, accountable infrastructure
stewardship.
l �
A
�-
40orN
40
r 'Com prn*i Ian
p
J
i A
WATER MASTER PLAN POLICY STATEMENTS
SERVICE RELIABILITY (SR)
Deliver safe, reliable, and consistent water service by prioritizing system integrity,
SR1 redundancy where feasible, and proactive risk reduction in daily operations and
long-range planning.
Safeguard public health and regulatory compliance through disciplined
SR2 monitoring, documented operating practices, and continuous improvement in
water quality protection and emergency response readiness.
ASSET MANAGEMENT & MAINTENANCE (AM)
Manage the water system as a portfolio of assets by maintaining a complete
AM1 inventory and using consistent information on condition, performance, and
criticality to guide decisions.
Prioritize long-term maintenance and reinv ent as Southlake approaches
AM2 buildout by focusing renewal efforts on th t and undersized lines where
applicable and addressing system const nts be they become failures.
Plan and deliver capital and renewal ects using I ycle thinking evaluating
AM3 long-term performance, maintainabi a otal cost of ownership from design
through replacement.
Fund the water utility in a fi ci i ient and transparent manner by
FS1 aligning budgets, resery tes an capital planning with lifecycle needs
and long-term service pe do
Treat renewal and r ce lanned, ongoing obligation integrated into
FS2 annual planning so th tem r mains dependable without relying on crisis-
driven spendi
Advance a cVIinlith
-first culture by making efficient water use a shared
CD1 community varted through education, practical guidance, and clear
expectations iregional strategies and goals.
Prioritize education before enforcement by emphasizing outreach, coaching,
C1132 and voluntary compliance, and using enforcement as a measured backstop
when needed to protect community water stewardship goals.
Strengthen conservation outcomes by leveraging tools and partnerships such
C1133 as customer usage insights, early anomaly notifications, and collaboration with
HOAs and property managers to reduce avoidable waste.
DATA, . . . • . -
Improve reliability and efficiency through disciplined data management and
DT1 modern operational tools that support early detection, informed prioritization,
and timely corrective action.
WATER MASTER PLAN
LEVELS OF SERVICE & PERFORMANCE (LS)
Define and maintain clear levels of service for the water utility that reflect
LS1 community expectations for reliability, water quality, response, and system
performance using those expectations to guide planning and investment.
Manage the system to consistent service outcomes by routinely evaluating
LS2 performance, identifying service risks, and directing maintenance and
reinvestment to the areas that most affect reliability and customer experience.
Align operational practices, staffing, and capital programming with adopted
LS3 levels of service to ensure the City can consistently deliver the standard of
service it commits to providing.
Require new development and redevelopm&eonal
o demonstrate compatibility
7GD 1GD1 with the City's water system capacity, needs, and long-term
maintainability so growth does not shi voida risk or cost onto existing
residents.
Ensure that water infrastructure a ci d with development is planned,
GD2 designed, and constructed to sup lifecycle performance and City
maintenance standards, inclu oor ion with long-range system plans
and reinvestment priorities.
ORDINANCE
GLOSSARY OF TERMS
AD - Average Day Demand
MCL - Maximum Contaminant Level
AMI - Advanced Metering Infrastructure
MD - Maximum Day Demand
AMR - Automated Meter Reading
MG - Million Gallons
AWIA - America's Water Infrastructure Act
MGD - Million Gallons per Day
CIP - Capital Improvement Program
NRW - Non-Revenue Water
CMMS - Computerized Maintenance
Management System O&M - Operations and Maintenance
CoF - Consequence of Failure PH - Peak H Demand
DCP - Drought Contingency Plan PRV - P s educing Valve
DT - Data/Technology (Policy Statement SC A - Supervi Control and Data
Category) uisit,
EPA - U.S. Environmental Protection Agency SD Safe Drinking Water Act
ETJ - Extraterritorial Jurisdiction xas Commission on Environmental
ality
EST - Elevated Storage Tank
WDB - Texas Water Development Board
FS - Financial Sustainability (Polic
Category) UAW - Unaccounted-for Water
FNI - Freese and Nichol C. WCP - Water Conservation Plan
GD - Growth, Development ste
Protection (Policy Statement ry)
GIS - Geographic Information System
GPED - Gallons Per Employee Per Day
GPCD - Gallons Per Capita Per Day
GST - Ground Storage Tank
HEC - Hydrologic Engineering Center
(modeling suite, where referenced)
HPP - High-Pressure Plane
LOS - Level(s) of Service
LPP - Low-Pressure Plane
62 WATER MASTER PLAN SOUTHLAKE COMPREHENSIVE
WATER MASTER PLAN
All-Pipes Model - A hydraulic model that Demand Allocation - The method used to
includes the full distribution grid (not only distribute water demand across the hydraulic
major transmission mains), supporting model to reflect where water use occurs and
evaluation of localized constraints such as how demand concentrates geographically
neighborhood fire flow readiness and peak-hour (existing and buildout conditions).
pressure sensitivity.
Diurnal Demand Pattern - The daily cycle of
Appurtenance - A component associated water use that varies by time of day and season
with water mains and facilities, such as valves, and typically drives peak-hour system stress
hydrants, fittings, meters, and related devices. during irrigation seasons.
Asset Inventory - The organized record of Distribution System - The network of water
water infrastructure assets and their key mains, valves, hydrants, service connections,
attributes (e.g., location, material, size, and related components that delivers water
installation year, and operational role) used to from wholesa supply, storage, and pumping
support planning and maintenance decisions. facilities to tourers.
Buildout - The planning condition when the Droug onti ncy Plan (DCP) - The City's
community is assumed to be substantially ado d plan th tablishes staged drought
developed consistent with the City's Land r onse easure , riggers, communications,
Use Plan (this Water Master Plan references a n cement mechanisms.
buildout conditions using a 2040 horizon).
levat torage Tank (EST) - A storage tank
Capital Improvement Program (CIP) - The e ove ground that helps maintain
City's multi-year plan for funding and deliverin s (hydraulic grade) and provides
capital projects, including renewal, re ent, perational and emergency reserves.
and system improvements recom ded
this plan. mergency Intertie - A connection between
water systems that can provide limited backup
Condition Assessment - Th o supply or operational flexibility during outages
evaluating an asset's curr state g or supply constraints.
inspection results, maint ce histo , break/
leak trends, and other perfo nce i icators. Fire Flow Readiness (Planning-Level) - A
planning evaluation of the distribution system's
Conservation and Demand Stew ship - A ability to support firefighting needs under stress
coordinated set of customer tools, outreach, conditions using model-based pressure and
operational practices, and accountability deliverability screening (separate from site-
measures intended to reduce avoidable use specific flow testing).
and moderate peak demand to support system
reliability and affordability. Firm Capacity (Supply or Pumping) - The
capacity available with the largest single
Consequence of Failure (CoF) - The severity component out of service (e.g., largest pump
of impacts if an asset fails, such as service unavailable), reflecting realistic maintenance/
disruption, public safety impacts, property outage conditions.
damage, cost, and duration of outage.
Ground Storage Tank (GST) - A ground-level
Criticality - A measure of an asset's importance storage tank that provides operational storage
to system function, considering factors such and supports pumping into the distribution
as customers served, redundancy, corridor system.
role, pressure plane influence, and emergency
response significance.
Hydraulic Grade - The energy level of water in Pressure Plane - A pressure management zone
the system (often represented as an elevation), (High-Pressure Plane or Low-Pressure Plane)
which directly influences pressure at customer maintained to provide consistent service across
locations. varied topography, supported by storage and
PRV operations.
Hydraulic Model - A computerized
representation of the water system used to Pressure Reducing Valve (PRV) Station -
simulate flows, pressures, tank cycling, pumping Facilities that regulate pressure between
operations, and performance under various pressure planes and allow controlled transfers
demand and outage scenarios. while protecting system integrity.
Looping - Interconnecting water mains Reinvestment - Planned renewal, rehabilitation,
to create multiple flow paths, improving or replacement of existing infrastructure to
redundancy, circulation, and reliability during sustain performance, manage risk, and control
maintenance or unplanned breaks. lifecycle cost.
Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) - A Resilienc e ability of the water system
federally established maximum permissible to with d uptions (e.g., extreme heat,
concentration of a contaminant in drinking outa line br supply constraints) and
water under the Safe Drinking Water Act. re er s rvice w maintaining public health
ect'
Maximum Day Demand (MD) - The highest
total daily demand in a given period, typically Risk et Risk) - The combination of
occurring during hot, dry conditions and use 'ho f failure (informed by condition/
as a key system stress scenario. nce) and consequence of failure
nformed by criticality).
Non-Revenue Water (NRW) - Wate at
enters the system but is not bille e to ADA (Supervisory Control and Data
breaks, meter inaccuracies, unauth s Acquisition) - Monitoring and control systems
or authorized unmetered us fl ng, that provide real-time information on key
firefighting). system conditions (e.g., pressures, tank levels,
pump status) and support operational decision-
Operational Flexibility - Th ility t aintain making.
reliable service under changi o ions
using redundancy, storage, pu options, Service Connection - The connection that links
pressure plane transfers, and operational the public water main to a customer meter and
protocols. the private service line.
Operations and Maintenance (O&M) - Day- Strategic Management System (SMS) - The
to-day activities required to operate, inspect, City's framework that aligns strategic priorities,
maintain, and repair the water system. departmental business plans, budgeting, the
CIP, and performance reporting.
Peak Hour Demand (PH) - The highest hourly
demand within a day; often the condition that Unaccounted-for Water (UAW) - The difference
produces the lowest pressures and greatest between water supplied and water billed; a
short-duration stress. common indicator of system losses, meter
accuracy issues, and data integrity.
Peaking Factor - A multiplier used to describe
how demand increases above average (e.g., Water Age - The time water remains in the
MD/AD or PH/MD), used in planning to evaluate system before reaching customers; elevated
peak scenarios and size facilities. water age can occur where turnover is low and
WATER MASTER PLAN
may require operational attention (e.g., tank
mixing, cycling strategies).
Water Conservation Plan (WCP) - The City's
adopted plan describing conservation goals,
strategies, and implementation measures,
maintained to meet state expectations.
Water Infrastructure Asset Management Plan
- The City's planned comprehensive asset
management program for water infrastructure,
used to inventory assets, assess condition and
risk, prioritize reinvestment, and align funding
and performance reporting.
P Practical results
Enz< ECHOLS
r FREESE Innovative approaches
WATER MASTER PLAN UPDATE
Prepared for:
City of Sout e
NDRE •FRANKO
. .......I .......
0 ss,o•NS �al= 2/17/2025
FREESE AND NICHOLS, INC.
TEXAS REGISTERED
ENGINEERING FIRM
F-2144
Prepared by:
FREESE AND NICHOLS,INC.
801 Cherry Street,Suite 2800
Fort Worth,Texas 76102
817-735-7300
FNI Project Number: SOL23548
66 WATER MASTER PLAN I SOUTHLAKE COMPREHENSIVE
WATER MASTER PLAN
r�FS
NICHGLS
Water Master Plan Update CITY OF
City of South lake + SOUTHLAKE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Freese and Nichols, Inc.(FNI)was retained by the City of Southlake(City)to prepare a Water Master Plan
Update consisting of updated population,employment and water demand projections,an updated water
model,growth related capacity improvements, and water age,source trace,and resiliency analysis.These
focus areas culminated with the development of a Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) which prioritizes
improvements based on capacity, resiliency, and operational flexibility.This report presents the analysis,
approach, findings,and results of the Water Master Plan Update.The re mmended improvements will
serve as a basis for the design, construction and financing of water ' and facilities required to meet
Southlake's existing and future system needs, as well as regulat apa requirements.
2.0 EXISTING WATER DISTRIBUTION S M
The City of Southlake's water distribution system is divi two major pressure planes in order to
maintain appropriate pressures throughout t The Lo essure Plane consists of the eastern
portion of the City and is supplied by the T.W. Ki Pum ) and Pearson PS.The Dove Elevated
Storage Tank(EST), Miron EST,and Bi ial Pa serve the Lower Pressure Plane with an overflow
elevation of 801 feet, which set e stati ydrauli adient and provides pressure maintenance. The
High Pressure Plane generally co s portion of the City and is supplied by the Pearson
PS. The High Pressure P n o ow elevation of 860 feet, which is established by the Florence
EST.The pump sta ' and grou ora anks are supplied from the City of Fort Worth through a 42-
inch water supply lin the Fo orth Caylor Rd. tank and 36-inch/30-inch water supply line from
the North Beach PS and s Is system reflects the system as it operates at the time of model
calibration.
3.0 POPULATION, EMPLOYMENT,AND WATER DEMAND PROJECTIONS
Growth projections are a critical component of the water master planning process.The magnitude and
distribution of the growth in population and non-residential development will dictate where future
infrastructure is required. Future population and employment projections were developed for two
planning years, existing (2023) and buildout (2040).To determine the density of future population and
employment growth throughout the City, existing and future land use types were reviewed within the
water service area based on geographic information system (GIS) data provided by the City. Along with
ES-1
ORDINANCE NO. 1032A I ADOPTED2026
•WFREESE
NICHO LS
Water Master Plan Update CITY OF
City of Southlake 9 SOUTHLAKE
existing and future GIS land use data, FNI utilized the City's Future Land Use Plan Update, North Central
Texas Council of Governments(NCTCOG)Census Block Groups,and specific development data to calculate
and distribute population and non-residential employment projections. Table ES-1 presents the City's
projected population and employment for each planning period by pressure plane.
Table ES-1: Population and Employment Projections
Pressure Residential Non-Residential
Year Plane Population Employment
High 6,956 1,772
Existing
Low25,019 30,831
High 7,183 95
Buildout
Low 27,245 2
rl
Water demands were projected for the existing and buil plann' periods fo e City.The evaluation
of historical trends in the per capita data provided a basi rmining the design criteria.Table ES-2
summarizes the water demand projections for xisting ( and buildout(2040) planning periods
by pressure plane.
Ta ater and Projections
1,772 1.98 4.76 10.48
Existing
L 25, 30,831 8.60 20.65 45.43
High 83 1,895 2.05 4.93 10.84
Buildout
Low 27,245 38,612 1 9.67 1 23.21 51.07
Buildout Total 34,428 . i
4.0 WATER MODEL DEVELOPMENT AND CALIBRATION
An all-pipes water model was developed using InfoWater Pror,software by Autodesk.The model network
was developed from the City's GIS and as-built design plans. In order to verify that the hydraulic model
accurately represents actual distribution system operation, a model calibration analysis was performed.
The calibration process involves adjusting system operation, demand allocation, and peaking factors to
match a known condition.The 24-hour period occurring from 12:00 AM on August 29,2022,to 12:00 AM
on August 30, 2022, was selected for calibration.This day was chosen because demands were relatively
ES-2
68 WATER MASTER PLAN I SOUTHLAKE COMPREHENSIVE
WATER MASTER PLAN
rI FREESE
I -NICHOLS
Water Master Plan Update CITY OF
City of Southlake 9 SOUTHLAKE
high, typical operations were observed, and no monitoring outages occurred. The all-pipes hydraulic
model developed for this study is suitable for existing and future system analysis and CIP planning.The
all-pipes extended period simulation(EPS)model allows for more accurate analysis in the future,including
water quality,fire flow,and development reviews.
5.0 HYDRAULIC CAPACITY ANALYSIS
As a public water utility,the City of Southlake must comply with the rules and regulations for public water
systems set forth by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) in Chapter 290. Hydraulic
analyses using the existing and future system EPS model scenarios were co ducted to identify deficiencies
in the City of Southlake's existing water distribution system and to de p a capital improvement plan to
reinforce the existing system and meet projected water de s t h buildout (2040). Various
combinations of improvements and modifications were inv ated to det e the most appropriate
approach for meeting projected demands. Paramet sed i eveloping a improvements plan
included increasing system reliability through the dev etcf outage scenarios, evaluation of
pressure plane operations and boundaries, m equired lows, and maintaining proper residual
pressures. The hydraulic analysis included t de t nd identification of water system
improvements to accommodate fu rowth e optimizing existing system operations and
infrastructure.
The City currently meets the T equireme and FNI's recommendation for existing storage,
pumping, water supp ca .ty. In the future, the City will require additional pumping and
ground storage ca y to meet r me ded standards.
6.0 WATER AGE, TRACE,AND RESILIENCY ANALYSIS
Following the water model calibration and existing and future system analyses, FNI conducted a water
age analysis of the water distribution system.The water age analysis calculates the age within the City's
system based on how usage affects the rate of flow over time throughout the system. A source trace
analysis was performed using the calibrated hydraulic model.The results provide a percentage of water
from each water source at a given location within the distribution system. FNI also conducted a reliability
analysis of the distribution system to meet projected water demands under various water supply outage
scenarios.The outage scenarios are shown below.
ES-3
WFREESE
'I INICHOLS
Water Master Plan Update CITY OF
City of Southlake 9 SOUTHLAKE
• Existing System Average Day with Florence EST Offline
• Existing System with T.W. King PS Offline
• Buildout System Average Day with Pearson PS Offline (CIP Scenario 3)
Overall,the modeled water age in the system is low with no major areas of concern for all scenarios.The
results generally show that the water age is greatest at the southeast edge of the Low Pressure Plane by
the Miron EST.
The source trace analysis shows that,under existing system average day demands,the Pearson PS supply
and T.W. King PS supply mix near TX-114 in the Low Pressure Plane and that the Pearson PS supply reaches
as far north as the Dove EST.Under buildout system CIP Scenario 2 aver ay demands,the Pearson PS
supply and T.W.King PS supply mix between the Park EST and Miron n the Low Pressure Plane South.
The Pearson PS supply and T.W. King PS supply mix near Sleepy w Tr d near Stacy Dr. in the High
Pressure Plane. Lastly,under buildout system CIP Scenario erage day dem the Pearson PS supply
and T.W. King PS supply mix near Miron EST and the ter P the Low Pressure Plane South.The
Pearson PS supply and T.W. King PS supply mix near Slee ow Trail and near Stacy Dr. in the High
Pressure Plane.
The resiliency analysis model results illustrated th he re Plane can operate under an average
day demand with the Florence ES with use of the PRVs on the boundary to maintain
appropriate system pressures. itionall he mo results show that the Pearson PS can serve 1.3
times(or 130%)of the existing av em PP=11.2 MGD)with firm pumping capacity and 1.5
times the existing aver an P =12.9 MGD) with total pumping capacity if the T.W. King PS
were to be offline tly,the mo �he
esu demonstrated that the T.W. King PS can serve the buildout
average day demand i LPP wh' proposed Booster PS is pumping 10 MGD from the LPP North to
the LPP South for a few ho e day.
7.0 WATER SYSTEM CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN
A Capital Improvement Plan was developed for the City of Southlake's water distribution system to
provide the required capacity and reliability to meet projected water demands through buildout(2040).
Four CIP options were originally presented to the City to supply additional water to the LPP. Based on
discussion of pros and cons, as well as a high-level cost comparison,the scenarios were narrowed down
to two options (Scenario 2 and Scenario 3), which were focused on for the hydraulic analysis and CIP
portion of this report. Scenario 2 includes a 20-inch water line from T.W. King PS to the Miron EST, and
ES-4
70 WATER MASTER PLAN I SOUTHLAKECOMPREHENSIVE
WATER MASTER PLAN
r�NICHOLS
Water Master Plan Update CITY OF
City of South lake +9SOUTHLAKE
Scenario 3 includes a 5.0 MGD booster pump station on the boundary between the proposed LPP North
and LPP South to supply water to the Low Pressure Plane South which will boost pressures near the Miron
EST.
Planning level cost estimates were developed for all projects. All project costs shown in this report are
based on construction costs representing 2024 conditions and should be adjusted in the future to reflect
the current construction environment. The cost estimates include material and construction costs,
engineering design fees, and general contingency. Additional expenses related to environmental,
geotechnical, land acquisition,change order contingency,operations and maintenance,and soft costs are
not included.These costs also do not include escalation or inflation.Ta S-3 summarizes the costs for
the water system capital improvement plan in 2024 dollars.
Table li Capital Improvements li ost Su
• -
1 T.W. King Pump Station Exp on an G GST $ 34,629,000
2 20-inch Water Line along Kirkw I nd Dove Rd. $ 13,903,500
3 12-inch Water Like along Ra Mill Rd. $ 1,612,900
4 16-inch Water Line a I Ln.a nson Rd. $ 2,150,500
5a Scenario 3:5 MGD BoosteMILS an ter Line along $ 12,671,000
Southla var
5b :T.W. g 20-inch Line $ 30,078,000
6 Bou ry Adjustments $ 668,700
7 16Irle
on EST to Kimball Ave. $ 2,447,100
8 om Miron EST to Kings Brook Ct. $ 408,000
9 er Line along E.Highland $ 2,669,500
10 ter Lines along TX-114 $ 2,614,000
11 nch .White Chapel Blvd to Lilac Ln. and $ g15,7DD
verwood Cir.
12 8er Line from Loch Meadow Dr. to Harbor Ct. $ 519,200
13 84 Water Line from N.Field Dr.to Walnut Grove $ 1,965,200
14 8-inch Water Line along E. Bob Jones Road $ 630,400
15 8-inch Water Line from Malton Ln.to Bent Wood Ln. $ 195,400
16 12-inch Water Line along Breeze Wy. $ 945,600
00
'The total cost includes Project 5b.The total will be less If Project 5a is chosen.
ES-5