Loading...
Item 3 (2)Grapevine/Southlake Proposed Boundary Adjustment Background Information Grapevine Proposal Legal Issues Options Council Discussion Discussion Topics Background Information Primary Issues Sanitary Sewer Service Provision Simmons Addition Grapevine Plaza Grapevine Proposal Simmons Forest Addition Vicinity Map Sanitary Sewer Provisions Simmons Forest Addition Sept. 1998 Agreement Grapevine & Southlake 10-Year Agreement – Expired September 2008 Grapevine to serve 40 Southlake residential lots Southlake to serve 40 Grapevine residential lots Current Status of Agreement Investigation yields 35 Southlake lots served by Grapevine Need to be able to serve all of the area (49 lots) Septic service not an option for lots in floodplain Current Sewer Accounts Simmons Forest & Rainforest Vicinity Lots currently being developed GRAPEVINE Grapevine Plaza Addition Vicinity Map Sanitary Sewer Provisions Grapevine Plaza Addition June, 1990 Agreement 5-year term Grapevine provides sewer to: Lots 1-3 Grapevine Plaza Addition (Blockbuster, Cici’s Pizza, etc) Current Status: Expired Grapevine still providing service Grapevine Proposal “Continue sewer service to Southlake as needed, with agreed upon limits, in the event a boundary adjustment could be mutually agreed upon.” Proposed Boundary Adjustment Proposed Boundary Adjustment Adjustment Area Proposed Agreement Terms Sewer Agreement for Simmons Addition (99 years) Adjust boundary to eliminate out parcels Inter-local agreement for construction of Kimball per Southlake MTP (GV cost = $2,000,000) Share cost of emergency water connection/ meter at Austin Oaks entrance Grapevine to purchase SL water line (reduced for age) Agree to future Nolen Drive connection Proposal Pros & Cons Sanitary Sewer Service Provision Tax Issues Public Safety Service Redevelopment Considerations Proposal Pros and Cons – Sewer Service PROS Construction Cost Avoidance ($1,185,000*) Not required to construct 2 lift stations and force mains Reallocate Utility Fund CIP budgeted dollars Maintenance & utility cost avoidance Could serve remaining developed and undeveloped lots CONS Service to Southlake residents provided through interlocal agreement * 2007 Costs Simmons Addition Cost to Sewer Requires Use of Lift Station Construction of New Lift Station Use of Existing Grapevine Lift Station Requires construction of Force Main Probable cost $605,000 (2007 Cost) New Agreement w/ Grapevine for use of Lift Station Sanitary Sewer Service Map of Simmons Forest Addition Grapevine Plaza Cost to Sewer Sewer back to the west (Gateway Plaza) Probable Cost $580,000 (2007 Costs) Requires SH 114 bore Requires TxDOT utility permit Sanitary Sewer Service Map of Grapevine Plaza Proposal Pros and Cons – Tax & Financial Impacts PROS Tax revenues in the study area are limited Clarifies confusing tax allocation & collection CONS Permanent adjustment to boundary Concedes future tax revenue OTHER Financial payback period Assumes $1.2 – 1.4 million 20 years at 5% Pay back period = 39 years Proposal Pros and Cons – Public Safety PROS- Proposed boundary preferred to lessen confusion Little to no impact on DPS issues Fire & EMS Calls 2002-2007 = 31 total (See chart) Fire & EMS Calls Proposal Pros and Cons – Public Safety (cont.) Police -5 Businesses Police Calls 2006-2007= 22 total (See Chart) Cons - None Police Calls To Move Forward Legal Agreements Required Inter-local Agreement - legal process for boundary adjustment Inter-local Agreement for construction of Kimball Road Sanitary Sewer Service Agreement – Simmons Addition Proposal Pros and Cons – Redevelopment PROS Likely no near-term redevelopment Difficult due to one owner of both GV & SL portions Potential future cloverleaf at intersection, reducing redevelopment ease of access CONS Potentially fast-food along access road in future, but unlikely due to not being on SH 114 frontage road Options Approve negotiated proposal Modify proposal Reject proposal; Install sewer Discussion Proposed Parcel Areas