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 AdditionCost 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 ServiceMap of Simmons Forest Addition
Grapevine PlazaCost 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 ServiceMap 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